Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 2, 2024 - Jim Fetzer

01:57:00

The Raw Deal (2 February 2024) with Susan Bradford

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Not just anybody.
	You know, I need someone.
	I was young, so much younger than today.
	I never needed anybody's help in any way.
	But now these days have gone, and I'm so self-assured.
	I know if I change my mind, I'll open up the door.
	Help me if you can, I feel it now.
	And I do appreciate you being around.
	I'll get my teeth back on the ground.
	I'll get you.
	Well, this is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal, right here on Revolution Radio, the second day of February, 2021.
	I have a special guest, Susan Bradford, with me, an independent-minded journalist, published many books, lots to say.
	I want to begin, however, with a number of developments, including Colonel McGregor, Reality is not seen by those living on Fantasy Island in Washington, D.C.
	The colonel has so much to say.
	He would, I believe, make a marvelous secretary of defense in a Trump administration.
	Check it out.
	Well, first of all, let's pause for a minute and discuss Washington's perspective.
	Because as Petraeus, who I think is a failed officer in the worst sense of the word, who became a general officer, should never have been a general officer.
	and And just he's one of these people who's moved from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.
	Baby betrayals.
	Yes.
	One of the things that he likes to say is it doesn't matter what happens in Iraq.
	What matters is what people in Washington think.
	Understand that Washington lives on an island.
	We call it Fantasy Island.
	And on Fantasy Island, Washington, D.C., people in Washington think that the Ukrainian war has been an enormous success story.
	Stop and consider this.
	They think that we've actually harmed the Russians.
	They believe that the Russians are incompetent and incapable of doing more than they have.
	They refuse to see reality.
	Absolutely out of the question.
	I'm not sure that if Russian forces marched through Kiev All the way to the Polish border that they would ever come to terms with reality.
	They are absolutely certain that this proxy war against Russia must continue.
	Now that's Fantasy Island's view and all of this without regard to the Ukrainian people, without regard to anyone there, without regard I would argue to Europeans in general.
	They could care less.
	All of it as far as they're concerned could become a war zone If it arms Russia, hence you see the stupidity in Finland, the stupidity in Sweden.
	So what is it in reality?
	In reality, the Ukrainian nation is probably dead.
	Millions and millions and millions of Ukrainians have left the country.
	They will never go back.
	The birth rate, which was already low, has now gone through the floor.
	I mean, people are simply not building families and families are essential to The survival of any civilization culture.
	Now we have the Procurator General who finally admitted in public that the Ukrainians have lost 500,000 soldiers on the battlefield.
	Gosh, what a surprise.
	What has General Kuyat said?
	What have I said?
	What have others said who have any sense of reality?
	Ukraine is being destroyed.
	Now, could Ukraine be in worse shape?
	Of course.
	The Russians could have gone in and done in Ukraine what the Israelis are doing in Gaza.
	There's a difference.
	The Russians don't want to kill Slavic Orthodox Christians like themselves.
	They never have.
	By the way, the Russians don't want to kill Europeans.
	They want to do business with them.
	So this is not Gaza.
	All the terrible war crimes attributed to the Russians have not happened.
	In fact, if there are significant war crimes, they were committed by the Ukrainian forces.
	And we know who those people are.
	The sad truth of the matter is, I'm afraid Ukraine is finished as a nation state, but we will continue to pretend that it's something real until it absolutely is not.
	And the Russian forces are now advancing across the front.
	Albeit slowly and deliberately, but I think even the truth has finally sunk in in Moscow, that they're not going to find a partner to talk to.
	And if they can't, they have to go to the Dnieper River and probably cross it and go into Kiev.
	And that is something that no one on the Russian side wants to do, because Kiev is practically a holy city in the history and culture of Russia.
	That is the beginning of Orthodox Christianity.
	That's the Jerusalem of the Russian culture.
	Yes, and so they don't want to fight in that city, and Zelensky could care less about those things.
	He's shut down Christianity in Ukraine.
	He's arrested people for it.
	This man is worse than the NKVD and the Bolsheviks, so they may still have to do that whether they like it or not, but there's no one in the West right now that's going to admit anything.
	Now, if something were to change in Washington, then I'm sure that many of the vassal states would go along with it, but I still think The so-called vassal European states are going to have to have change in their own governments.
	It's up to the Germans, the French, and everybody else to put an end to it.
	They've got to do it.
	They've got to come to terms with reality.
	But you and I know, you're the voice in the wilderness.
	How many people get to listen to you, Roger?
	So what are they listening to every night on television?
	They're listening to lies, nonsense, fantasy.
	Well, we have an encouraging growth of viewers, especially in Germany.
	And I'm, as an eternal optimist, I think that it starts to dawn on people that all Susan, I think that's just wonderful that Colonel McGregor's got it right.
	He's one of the few truth-tellers out there.
	I'm just so proud of the guy.
	I do think it would be superb.
	I mean, we got this Lloyd Austin, whom I was convinced died on January 3rd in a massive missile strike in a Underground bunker in Kiev, blown into little pieces, thus they had to make up these fantasy stories about him being hospitalized out of communication for a week with his superiors and his subordinates, based on my former military experience in consultation with experts.
	This is impossible!
	He cannot have been Out of communication, thus, making up such a fantastic, incredible, literally unbelievable story.
	I interpret that as confirmation for my thesis that he, in fact, had been killed.
	And now we have Zelensky replacing the head of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the former head, by the way, having been in that same bunker, and therefore, I believe, having been obliterated with Lloyd Austin.
	But now we've had a press conference and there you have a guy who looks like Lloyd Austin.
	And I tell you, Susan, it's either a holographic imitation or I was wrong about him being blown into pieces.
	And anyone who has followed holographs No, we have lots of examples.
	Someone coming out, giving a speech, everyone finds it convincing, they applaud, and then he disappears because it was just a hologram.
	So I don't rule that out.
	What is your take, Susan?
	Very interesting, Jim.
	Mike, and I agree with you in part, I think that right now our nations unfortunately have fallen.
	They're under the control of international crime syndicates, and I think most of our leaders at this point are puppet leaders.
	And the shadow powers that be are using CGI.
	And I think I sent you a video from the 1980s, which depicted that as of the 1980s, the elites were using robotoids and synthetics as intelligence devices, as de facto leaders that they were controlling, like puppet leaders, Manchurian candidates.
	So you could very well be right.
	I don't know whether they were killed or not.
	They may very well have been, but I think a lot of the people who do appear on TV may not be who we think they are, but I think they are carrying out an agenda, essentially, like their role is being written for them.
	Well, I'm reminded of the Sherlock Holmes admonition, when you have ruled out the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
	And that works again and again.
	Assassination of 9-11, Sandy Hook, and I bring together groups of experts to sort these things out.
	And when you've eliminated the impossible, and that includes sorting out the difference between authentic and fabricated evidence, Whatever remains must be the truth, as we had, believe it or not, eight different shooters in DeLorean Plaza on 9-11.
	Two of the planes weren't even in the air, and the other two were in the air four years later.
	I mean, that's just outrageous, Susan.
	You know, you think the government has given you, if not the truth, a close facsimile, but it's nothing even remotely.
	And Sandy Hook, FEMA drill all the way.
	Nobody died at Sandy Hawk.
	And then they had a series of lawsuits, including against Alex Jones, but also against me, where there were, according to participants in the event, by the way, with whom I've been in communication now for over a year, all those lawsuits had predetermined conclusions.
	And they never went to a jury, Susan.
	They found ways To circumvent having a jury trial.
	The Jones thing was based on a failure for discovery, which no one can discern what it was he failed to provide a discovery.
	We have Robert Barnes, a brilliant attorney in the courtroom in Austin, saying there were three cameras there.
	One was set up looking at the jury.
	It was unlike any courtroom he'd ever seen.
	And he thought it was a made-for-TV movie.
	In my case, because I brought together 13 experts, including six PhDs, we had established the school had been closed by 2008.
	There were no students or teachers there.
	There had been a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control when we even had a FEMA manual, Susan.
	It goes on Amazon on 22 October 2015, and less than a month later, 19 November, they banned the book!
	Why?
	Not because it's wrong, but because it blows the whole thing apart, so I release it for free as a PDF.
	It's been downloaded millions of times.
	They had to staunch the flow, so they brought a What I've got to say is a fabricated lawsuit against me.
	They must have spent years trying to figure out how to put it together and brought a suit against me in Wisconsin where, because of the peculiarities of the Wisconsin laws for summary judgment, Well, you're only allowed to have a summary judgment if there are no disputed facts, and then the judge can apply the law to save the time and trial of a jury when there are no disputed facts.
	Our facts were massively disputed because he was claiming he had a son who died at Sandy Hook, even had a death certificate that I had described as fake because a copy he'd actually put up.
	On his own website and shared with a colleague of mine, had no file number, no town certification, no state certification.
	Well, it turns out in Connecticut lawsuits and not even parents are allowed to have uncertified certificates.
	So when I was sued, I thought it was very peculiar because they attached a complete death certificate with file number, town, state, and then said in the complaint, they were not materially different, which of course is absurd.
	Material differences are differences to the law.
	File numbers, town, and state certifications are material differences.
	And in the course of that trial, the judge shut out all of my evidence as unreasonable.
	What you're allowed to do in Wisconsin.
	The judge can make that determination, but that means the judge is making an evaluation of the evidence, which under standard law he's not allowed to do.
	He's only allowed to apply the law.
	So we have in Wisconsin a very peculiar situation depriving Defendants like myself have the right to a trial by jury.
	I carried this all the way up to the Supreme Court, Susan, which declined to rule.
	And they excluded from publication two appendices I had when I sought a re-hearing.
	I petitioned for a re-hearing.
	That not only had the FEMA manual we discovered already, but new evidence from Connecticut FEMA showing right on the schedule for Connecticut FEMA was a Sandy Hook drill, a map Connecticut FEMA had put on how to get from Bridgeport down to Dickinson Drive, the location of the school, and did a separate appendix.
	A Texas licensed private investigator by the name of Brian Davidson, completely brilliant guy, got into the access, the Connecticut State Police files and found photographs that showed not only that it was not a mass murder, but that it wasn't even an operating school.
	And they made that unavailable to the public, Susan, no doubt because it would have created a sensation.
	So, I've now published on my blog, and it's been republished on UNZ.com, the demolition of justice in America, going through five different cases, Including the Eugene Carroll absurdity.
	This was a fantasy trial.
	This is a woman who's obsessed with sex.
	She can't even remember the year, much less the month or the week or the day or the time when it happened.
	I think any woman who's been raped absent roofies would remember all of that.
	Once she misdescribes a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room, it's a phony account, makes it impossible.
	Her claim about how the sex occurred standing up is very difficult to envision physiologically how that could have been done.
	She even appeared in a dress on the cover of New York Magazine saying that this is a dress I wore when I was raped by Donald Trump, a dress that turns out hadn't even been manufactured in 2005 or 6 when this is I mean, Susan, this is so insulting.
	And then we have the Fannie Willis absurdity where she hires her married lover, gives him hundreds of thousands to go on luxury trips to the Caribbean.
	Give me a break!
	And then I talked about three Supreme Court cases.
	The Texas case, challenging the outcome of the 2020 election, Where Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia all violated their own laws about how electors are to be appointed, where the Supreme Court declined on the alleged lack of standing.
	But this was a dispute between states.
	That's what the Supreme Court is supposed to do, to deal with and arbitrate disputes between states.
	And I'd make that on the new ruling now.
	About which one?
	And then my own.
	I mean, oh, the border, the border ruling, right?
	Because Texas brought another case about securing the borders.
	Biden challenged it, and the court ruled that Biden had the right to shut down Texas from its efforts to maintain the border, which a Biden admin is refusing to do.
	So you got the first about the integrity of our election system, then which nothing could be more important, unless it's the second, the security of our nation from invasion.
	And then third, mind the vitiation of our right to a trial by jury.
	Susan, it's stunning.
	It's out there and no significant figure, no prominent figure in the media is willing to pick it up and talk about it.
	I am so ashamed, not just of the United States, especially of course for the atrocities taking place in Gaza, which has been a PR disaster for America, but that prominent people aren't picking up to talk about The fact that, for example, Wisconsin residents don't have the right to a trial by jury and it's by design.
	Susan, your thoughts on all of the above?
	Okay, a lot to take in there.
	I wanted to, I guess, address the Sandy Hook matter because, as you know, I worked on the Abramoff investigation, and I was really stunned to discover that the PR man who worked on Abramoff worked on the Sandy Hook issue.
	And these were, like, among a network of individuals who had—no, not so that specific individual did this—but within a network of individuals Who trotted out the lies that led us into war against Iraq.
	These were a group of people who have the contracts for the prison industrial complex, the mental health facilities.
	They were in charge of processing the children who came in across the border.
	These are children who were, you know, some of whom were members of gangs or taught to kill upon entry.
	They have, they control some of the ports, the FEMA camps, and so for them, The more misery, the more chaos that they can create, the more products they sell.
	You have to have a new security for schools.
	You have to have more mental health facilities.
	And so they make money through all of this.
	And I think that this influence of money is why we are now seeing so much corruption within the courts, because you have Really, teams of lawyers and judges who are all in cahoots, case after case, administration after administration, advancing a narrative on behalf of private special interests that are either bribing them, blackmailing them, or somehow they get some kickbacks by way of promotions and so forth.
	So I think it's very shameful that we are experiencing this.
	To me, utterly shocking that the Supreme Court would abdicate its responsibilities under the Constitution and to the American people.
	They are selling us out, Susan!
	The Supreme Court of the United States!
	And there were two parties who participated in this absurdity with taxes, shifting ground, the Chief Justice himself, John Roberts, and Amy Coney Barrett.
	And my understanding is they both have been pressured by blackmail related to adoptions, where the Chief Justice had adopted two boys from Ireland, but there were improprieties, and Amy Coney Barrett apparently
	Who's got lots of kids of her own, several from Africa, and my understanding from sources I regard as reliable is that they've both been blackmailed, so they were extorted to vote this way on the ground they could otherwise lose their kids.
	But in my opinion, under those circumstances, you resign your office.
	You can't allow yourself to be used and abused when you're in a role like that with the responsibilities it entails.
	So I'm shocked by the whole situation.
	Do you have any insights of your own or beliefs or not?
	Very interesting, Jim.
	Well, I think we saw how partisan the court had become during the election, the 2000 election, you know, where the Supreme Court was divided along party lines and the Democratic justices voted for the Democrats, the Republicans voted for the Republicans in regards to who could carry Florida, you know, for the presidential election.
	It wasn't based upon law, but partisanship.
	And I also know that Obamacare was previously Romneycare, so it was a Republican bill, a Republican takeover of the healthcare industry on behalf of pharmaceutical companies, and it should have been unconstitutional.
	But then, of course, we have Supreme Court Justice Roberts, who then rules that the mandate is a tax, and the federal government has a right to tax.
	So they're misinterpreting the Constitution, and I think a lot of these justices are, as you said, they're being somehow blackmailed, bribed, or otherwise incentivized into ruling the way that they are, and it's not, they're not interpreting the Constitution as their mandate requires them, and they're not serving as, you know, very loyal, a loyal check, actually, you know, not serving the role of the checks and balances, and, you know, evaluating whether laws are constitutional, or whether, you know, Yeah, just absolutely stunning.
	Very, very troubling.
	are constitutional or not.
	It's all based on partisanship and money now, it appears. - Yeah, just absolutely stunning.
	Very, very troubling.
	Let me see if I can recapture.
	Here we have Hungary now finally agreeing after holding out.
	And I was in admiration of Hungary for holding out Susan.
	You have now been induced to throw in 50 billion euros on a package from aid for Ukraine.
	The U.S.
	successfully pressured Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who is generally a good guy, That's nice, right?
	That's how you act in a collegial fashion.
	Ukraine and EU leaders agreed to push through the spending on Thursday.
	That was yesterday.
	Ahead of the summit, Financial Times reported the EU is threatening to sabotage Hungary's economy if Orban veto the spending pact.
	That's nice, right?
	That's how you act in a collegial fashion.
	You extort Hungary by threatening to destroy its economy if it doesn't go along with more money, good money being thrown after bad for Ukraine.
	A European diplomatic knowledge to Financial Times that the strategy was blackmail.
	Obama also held one-on-one meetings with other European leaders who convinced him to approve the aid.
	I don't think so.
	It was blackmail, pure and simple.
	Meanwhile, we have Lloyd Austin, and as I say, I find this very peculiar.
	I don't understand how I could be wrong about his having died in that missile attack in Ukraine, and it seems to me the absurdity of the explanations for his absence confirm it.
	So unless this is a deep fake, unless this really is a holographic projection, I'm at a loss.
	And really, I am inclined to follow that Sherlock Holmesian principle.
	And it is a deep fake and a hologram.
	But I'm prepared to be wrong.
	I mean, I'm not an infallible.
	So here we have Lloyd Austin.
	We don't know if Iran was involved in the Jordan drone attack.
	We don't know, Susan.
	We're about to undertake a massive week-long or weeks-long bombing campaign against Hezbollah on the ground of this attack when we don't even know who is responsible.
	Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Thursday admitted the U.S.
	does not know if Iran was operationally involved in the drone attack in Jordan.
	That killed three American soldiers on the same day.
	A U.S.
	official told CBS News plans have been approved for strikes against Iranian personnel and facilities in Iraq and Syria.
	When asked by a reporter how much Iran knew about the Jordan drone attack, or if it was operationally involved, Austin said, you know, we believe this was done by an element of what is known as the Axis of Resistance.
	And these are Iranian proxy groups.
	And how much Iran knew or didn't know, we don't know, but it really doesn't matter because Iran sponsors these groups.
	Austin said if the Shia militias he was believed were responsible for the attack were not supported by Iran, these kinds of things don't happen.
	That's a convoluted way of responding, because Susan may actually know who is responsible.
	They have records of all these rocket attacks.
	CENTCOM is refused to confirm, because as I suspect, it was fired from Israel.
	Now, this is just a classic false flag attack.
	Because Bibi's worried Trump could become president.
	Look at all the signs.
	He's so much up in the polling.
	Massive victories in Iowa, when you consider 70% of Nikki Haley's votes in New Hampshire were from non-Republicans.
	It was a wipeout there, too.
	So he wants to use up the U.S.
	to his benefit as much as possible.
	We'll be right back with Susan Bradford after this break.
	I'm Jim I'm five minutes if you want to get a time I think you're here okay listen to Revolution Radio prettyknownslopes.com we'll be right back
	look at the chat Management would like to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support which has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world.
	Do you want to be host when we return?
	I don't have any PowerPoints, but if you'd like me to talk, I can.
	- The front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	- I'm gonna get an isolate.
	- Okay.
	- Radio, so free speech will not be silent in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, you will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world. - Revolution Radio, freedomslipson.com, the number one listener supported radio station on the planet.
	Revolution.
	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.
	Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday at 8:00 p.m.
	Eastern.
	Eastern Time on Studio B for Momentary Zen with host Zen YCM.
	at the people station.
	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, freedomslips.com.
	100% listener-supported radio.
	And now we return you to your host.
	Well, Susan, I've just published on my blog an excellent piece about a PR disaster, U.S.
	support for genocide in Israel has become, and it seems to me what Lloyd Austin is saying here That he's willing to bomb groups in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, just because of an attack.
	And he actually, I think, knows better that it wasn't even coordinated by any of those groups, but by Israel as a false flag.
	I mean, this is how irresponsible America has become.
	We stand condemned in the eyes of the world, and justifiably so.
	Sad to say.
	I agree, I agree.
	Well, I, I think that our governments are, have been hijacked by, you know, these very kind of corrupt international crime syndicates.
	I think Israel is no exception.
	And so they're now reaping what they've sown, and we as a nation are reaping what we've sown.
	It's horrific.
	Yeah, you're welcome to elaborate and to introduce The subjects yet that were dear to your heart for today's show, too, so please do continue, Susan.
	Go for it.
	Okay, got the floor.
	Okay, well, I wanted to discuss a topic that is pervasive and is really, in my opinion, responsible for much of the problems that we're experiencing today with Israel, Ukraine, and all over, and that's international money laundering.
	And when I was kind of researching this, I was very kind of surprised, I guess, to see that the Federal Reserve may not be legitimate.
	I know that the Constitution allows Congress to print money, but the Federal Reserve Act, which is the basis upon which the Federal Reserve has any authority, was only sponsored by two individuals, Senator Ulrich And Nelson Aldridge and a congressman.
	So they proposed the Federal Reserve Act during Senate recess.
	The bill was not passed with a vote with the majority of either house, and then it was signed by President Wilson.
	And so it automatically became law.
	And then the marketing and the PR afterwards was that this bill enjoyed unanimous support from both houses.
	And the fact is that it didn't have any support beyond that of two people.
	So I'm wondering what, you know, ramifications that this would have, like the truth concerning the founding of the Fed would have with regards to the legitimacy of what the Fed is doing and the debt that is owed.
	But this agenda for global money laundering started in London at the late 19th century, launched by Rothschild, who wanted to control the gold supply and to control all the money in the world, to be like, you know, the owner of, to have all the power, all the money.
	So during World War II, there was an effort made to steal gold.
	They stole it from the Jews with their teeth during their possessions.
	The Japanese were enlisted to steal the gold from the Chinese and so on.
	And after the World Wars, which were kind of coordinated through proxy as part of a divide and conquer strategy to kind of remake Europe, Gold collateral accounts were established, and they were billed as a way to invest in humanity.
	But of course, what happened subsequently is that the gold was stolen.
	The dollar was originally pegged to gold.
	I'm not sure that was necessarily a good thing.
	The reason that they had done so is that they wanted to have the ability to engage in commerce, and therefore to have some kind of basis for that.
	Watch out ultimately controlled the gold market so they could always determine the you know the price and the gold price price of gold was rigged and paying the dollar to the gold enabled them to kind of manipulate trade deficits and trade policy.
	It was not necessarily in America's interest.
	But then we skip ahead to the Nixon administration.
	The Nixon administration launched the fiat currency and that decoupled the dollar from gold and enabled us to, as the nation, to print unlimited amounts of gold.
	So we did that through various UN organizations, including the USAID.
	And among the greatest recipients was the Marcos, Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, the dictators of Philippines.
	And the Philippines happened to be one of the areas where all the gold had been stored.
	They dug underground caves and so on, where they had placed the gold.
	And this was a point at which Kissinger was kind of trying to compromise the United States.
	He wanted to make us less independent and to eventually collapse us into a new world order.
	So one of the things that he did, he launched the petrodollar.
	One of the greatest beneficiaries of the petrol dollar was a defense trafficker, arms trafficker, by the name of Adnan Khashoggi.
	Adnan Khashoggi took contracts from Lockheed Martin along with Prince Bernard, the founder of the Bilderbergers, and they sold arms to the Saudis and other governments through bribery.
	So the money that the taxpayers gave Lockheed Martin that was in turn used to bribe the governments to buy Lockheed products.
	And a number of these individuals who participated in these schemes became billionaires.
	During the Reagan administration, we finally saw that the fruits of the Bolshevik Revolution had really come to pass.
	The Russian Revolution, as your viewers may know, was financed by Wall Street.
	It was conceived of the City of London by Rothschild during the Roundtable.
	And it was among the most bloody and brutal genocides in history.
	Maybe some 20 million people or so were killed brutally in unspeakable terms.
	By the late 1970s, 1980s, the Russians had succeeded at curbing their Bolsheviks.
	And Rockefeller became a little nervous about this because he had expected to have his face of power within the Kremlin.
	And so Kissinger, who was a triple Soviet-German-British agent, convinced the Rockefellers to implant the Bolsheviks within our political establishment because who better to know how to, you know, neutralize the Russians than the Bolsheviks?
	So, that was a terrible mistake that they made, a mistake for us, because now we have this kind of element, you know, within our establishment, this kind of Bolshevik mentality and operation syndicates.
	So, the Reagan administration, which in my opinion was very treasonous,
	Bear in mind that Russia had been returned to honest hands, so the Reagan administration engaged in currency speculation to collapse the ruble and that generated some, I think it was 27 to 30 trillion dollars that Reagan had said, had told I guess his advisors or I guess the American people
	That would be used to wean the American people off of this international debt.
	We would restore the economy, and this was to be invested in the public good.
	Well, of course, the money was promptly stolen, as we can anticipate.
	Among the individuals who were allegedly involved, and this was a report by Leo Wanta, who was the investor who created this multi-trillion dollar fortune, were George H.W.
	Bush and Hillary Clinton.
	They were among the recipients.
	So, as these elites are trying to create their new world order, they planned to have a fake collapse of the Soviet Union.
	So, overnight, you know, 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and one Soviet satellite after another, just without a shocking fire, collapsed.
	But this was a ruse and essentially the old Soviet command structure remained in place and Reagan and Gorbachev planned together to converge this old Soviet system with the United States to create like a new global communist under the new communist international under a new world order.
	Headquartered out of San Francisco, using the Green Movement as a vehicle for a New World Order.
	So, as we move into the Bush-Clinton administrations, The federal government is now began to kind of send money back to Russia, a country that was dedicated to destroying the United States.
	They sent money to Russia to rebuild our enemy, our sworn enemy.
	They did this under the guise of free enterprise.
	And so we have Soros and the religious right through working through an organization called the National Endowment for Democracy, I believe, to secure the placement of Boris Yeltsin and the so-called reform candidates.
	And during their reign, they engaged in loans for shares programs, and they were auctioning off Russian assets.
	So a number of these Russian oligarchs were able to acquire Russian assets for pennies on the dollar.
	And as was discovered by Bill Browder, who is an investor with Hermitage Capital, these billionaire oligarchs were They were operating for proxy for the Russian leadership.
	And so we have once Yeltsin leaves office, he's replaced by Putin.
	This was orchestrated by Larry Summers of Harvard, friend of Jeffrey Epstein, who was also behind the shock therapy.
	And the shock therapy was part of the strategy that was employed to shore up all the wealth in Russia in the hands of these oligarchs.
	So, once Putin takes over, Putin is secretly holding the power for the Russian oligarchs.
	And then, as I know from working on the Abramov investigation, Putin is serving as proxy for Jacob Rothschild, the head of this New World Order.
	And so you have like a center of international crime, a crime syndicate coalescing around the Kremlin.
	And these are, you know, some of the forces that are working against us today, trying to undermine Great Britain and the United States on behalf of Rothschild to collapse us into a new world order.
	At the same time, you have trillions of dollars that have been stolen from the countries that they're being, dictators are being kind of installed around the world, you know, seemingly coming out of nowhere.
	And these were individuals who were holding the wealth and power within those countries on behalf of, you know, this international crime syndicate.
	They were trying to establish monopolies for both business enterprise and for national resources.
	So one of the major money launderers who was kind of facilitating this international money laundering scheme was Adnan Khashoggi, you know, who was, you know, who was kind of created in part by Kissinger and who helped create international spy networks around the world for Kissinger.
	So Adnan Khashoggi and the Marcos got kind of caught.
	They were in around 1980s.
	I believe that one of the treasure hunters who had discovered that the gold in the Philippines had sued Marcos for trying to steal the gold that he had uncovered.
	In these caves, and the federal government was also litigating against Marcos and Khashoggi for international money laundering.
	This was also around the time that, you know, we have like the rise of the junk bond kings, the casinos, and all these different crimes, drugs proliferating around the world, human trafficking, money laundering, as these Crime syndicates are taking over the government and then distributing their wares around the world and, you know, compromising governments.
	So around in 1997, the Parisian court had fined Khashoggi for having imported some paintings that he had stolen into Paris back in the 1980s.
	And this was the year that Princess Diana was killed.
	So what was happening here is that finally the world was paying attention to this great international money laundering ring.
	And that's what we're really looking at.
	That's why Ukraine is being bombed.
	That's why we're having these proxy wars.
	It's all about decapitating governments and planning puppet regimes, stealing resources, stealing oil, moving money around the world, and having these people not be held accountable.
	What many people may not realize is that Adnan Khashoggi was the uncle of Dodi Fayyad.
	Dodi Fayyad was Princess Diana's lover.
	Adnan Khashoggi cut his deals with the defense contractors at the Ritz-Carlton in Paris That was owned by Mohamed El-Fayed, Dodi's father, and it was at the Ritz that these deals were cut.
	They had a lavish of spy operations set up, video cameras, bugs, where they could capture all, you know, compromising information on all of the participants.
	So, according to whistleblowers, and there are some deathbed confessions, Prince Philip, who was a business partner of Prince Ferdinand, also a partner of Adnan Khashoggi, had ordered Princess Diana's murder.
	He says she knew too much, she was causing trouble, and she was going to blow the whistle on them.
	And you have her now as a lover of Dodi El-Fayed, who's Khashoggi's nephew.
	His father, Mohammed El-Fayed, had married Shamira Khashoggi, Adnan Khashoggi's sister.
	The MI5 had planned an assault on Princess Diana that was intended to, I guess, to scare her or to kind of to silence her.
	But according to the MI5, the ultimate death was the murder was carried out by the Russian intelligence.
	And so you have Muhammad al-Fayyad also participating in this, you know, why would he participate?
	There could be many reasons like why was he willing to sell to sell out his own son or murder his allow his son to be murdered.
	Muhammad al-Fayyad essentially owed his wealth and privilege to the British monarchy and He became wealthy and powerful through his service and his connections to him, to them.
	And you can see that after Jamal Khashoggi paid the 1.6 million that he was fined, the following year, the Royal Family reimbursed the 1.6 million at the Ritz Carlton, the Ritz Hotel in London, under gambling debt.
	So he was reimbursed.
	And then the money laundering operation was able to kind of continue You know, as before.
	So, I have a little more to get to, but I think that that's kind of, that was why Princess Diana was murdered.
	And I was noticing too that around 1986, 1988, around the time the federal government was cracking down on the money laundering, this was the time in which the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was passed that would allow Indian tribes to launch casinos.
	The casinos were leading money laundering operations for this International Crime Syndicate.
	Um, among the first casino or tribes to launch casino was the Seminole Tribe of Florida.
	That was a tribe with, that was originally, this casino was originally seeded by Meyer Lansky, the founder of the National Crime Syndicate of Murder, Inc.
	He was a trained assassin for George H.W.
	Bush.
	He helped create Yudel Castro as a CIA asset.
	He laundered money, drugs, and arms around Latin America.
	And he was also connected to Resorts International, a Rothschild and Rockefeller-connected casino over which Donald Trump presided.
	And Donald Trump was also very deeply connected financially to the Seminole Tribe of Florida.
	And we see that this particular tribe is a linchpin in this international money laundering operation connected to the Crown, to the Rothschilds.
	And we also see that in 1986, both Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley both decided to go public in anticipation of a great deluge of money.
	They said, we don't know where it's coming from, but it's going to be overwhelming.
	And this money, I believe, was from the casinos.
	It may have been from this $33 trillion or so that Wanta had created.
	You know, through currency speculation in Russia.
	And once they went public, this outpouring of money came through to them by way of Japan through Sumitomo Bank.
	Japan, of course, was involved with kind of helping to move the gold around the world on behalf of this Global global collateral accounts that was meant to be the basis of financing the welfare of humanity, but became really the basis of this international money laundering where these elites are trying to, you know, steal the gold and the oil and the money.
	And a lot of this money now is being plunked down into real estate and, and other means and we see that, you know, they're, they're, they're really pricing Americans out of the market.
	Now we have homes going for 80 million dollars and, you know, these crazy prices.
	A lot of these homes are being purchased by private equity funds by these, you know, different capital groups that have acquired a phenomenal amount of money, billions of dollars that they are essentially holding by proxy for this international leak.
	So that's part of the reason why we're having so many problems today is this money that is out in the system.
	It's unaccounted for and there are a lot of people who Wow!
	would put country and God and principle and even family behind their own interest to get some of that money or to be compensated by creating false narratives, by covering for the elites, by somehow serving that agenda.
	But it is a criminal agenda.
	And unfortunately, that's what we're dealing with today.
	Wow.
	Hopefully I didn't overwhelm you.
	That's fascinating and provocative, Susan, raising a lot of questions I want to pursue with you.
	Let's think about Kissinger, of course, convincing Nixon to drop the gold standard and introduce a petrodollar.
	I mean, give us again an explanation.
	This is, to me, totally plausible that Henry Hague could have been an agent for multiple governments.
	He was probably the most clever spy or operative in world history.
	I mean, I'm saying bar none, in all probability.
	The benefit of taking us off the gold standard, which has now left us totally vulnerable because of the emergence of BRICS, people dropping the petrodollar.
	I mean, it only worked as long as the dollar remained the reserve currency for international transactions in oil.
	No longer retaining that status, which I believe spells a catastrophe for the U.S.
	that the value of the dollar is going to drop, that hyperinflation is rearing its head, and the consequences could be devastating for America.
	Could you just address that issue to begin with?
	Sure.
	I think that one of the reasons why they had to dispense with the gold standard is that there was some type of growing maybe trade deficit.
	I think that the foreign countries are trying to cash in their gold and they didn't have enough gold to kind of cover their bases.
	And so I think that they thought, well, we want to keep this New World Order agenda on track, we need the money.
	And so they cut us off of the gold standard so that they could print unlimited sums of money while Rockefeller and Rothschilds and their affiliated corporations went around the world looking for projects that they could do that the taxpayer would have to support.
	And I remember at the time that We had found, or our oil companies had found, large reserves of oil in Alaska.
	It was larger than Saudi Arabia, which would have enabled us to be energy independent.
	Kissinger blocked production of that oil, and then he instead created this petrodollar, so that all oil transactions would be traded in dollars.
	But at the same time, that enabled these shadowy foreign interests to kind of, you know, manipulate the price of oil, the, you know, interest rates.
	And so they could really determine what country succeeded, which failed, and they could have more control over the economy overall.
	But essentially, they wanted the money to be freed up so that they can print unlimited amounts of money.
	And then we, the people, would be left holding the debt for whatever, you know, while they acquired real assets with that money.
	Yeah, there's so much involving the Fed that is monstrous and evil.
	And I think JFK was actually going to circumvent.
	He had the Department of the Treasury print United States notes.
	I recall as a young Marine Corps officer holding one in my hand.
	It had red embossed imprints at the United States note instead of green Federal Reserve note on the ground that it was absurd for the government to be paying interest to a consortium of private banks for printing the currency of the United States, which could be done just as well by the Department of Treasury for no interest whatsoever.
	And, you know, that appears to have been one of the multiple reasons why he was taken out in Dallas on 22 November 1963.
	Far from the only, but a very important consideration.
	I mean, today, the Fed still wants us.
	I mean, the vast majority of our staggering national debt is interest to the Fed for bringing the currency.
	I mean, Susan, how horrific is that?
	It is horrific, and I think if I read correctly, I know that there were two different pieces of legislation connected to that.
	They were taking away power that had been granted to the President, and they were reassigning that to the Department of Treasury.
	But I think the problem with that was that there's a revolving door between the Fed and the Department of Treasury.
	And if I'm not mistaken, I think the Treasury right now may hold some type of status with the International Monetary Fund.
	And so they're essentially taking direction from kind of global entities which are controlling our economy.
	And I was kind of shocked to- Susan, hold that thought.
	We'll continue with Susan Bradford right after this break.
	Listening Revolutionary of freedomslips.com.
	- You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back after this message. - 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 a 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.
	If you think for one second that the Capitol will ever treat us fairly, you're lying to yourself.
	or if it could be 40%?
	Because we know 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 us.
	Good evening.
	We've tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
	that time is over.
	Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence at the hands of the tankers 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 is no secret that the so-called mainstream media is best described as controlled propaganda.
	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 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.
	Welcome to the second hour of the Raw Deal right here on Revolution Radio Studio B, where we're with Susan Bradford, who's been where we're with Susan Bradford, who's been giving a...
	Breathtaking summation of recent history, many fascinating aspects, not all of which I am convinced, but I am fascinated.
	So we're pursuing aspects, and we began with the role of Henry Kissinger and going off the gold standard, which I believe is now going to haunt the United States because the petrodollar is being abandoned.
	Susan, pick up where you left off.
	Okay, I think I'm not sure that the gold standard was necessarily a good thing.
	It was a step away from allowing our government to print its own money.
	When our country was founded, you know, the early colonies, the colonies were founded.
	The colonies printed their own money and they were quite prosperous.
	They printed enough for commerce and to satisfy the economic needs of their constituents, other people.
	And when the British Parliament became aware that we were printing our own money and doing very well, thank you very much, The Rothschilds caused a law to be written that prohibited the colonies from printing their own money and made us dependent upon the Bank of England.
	And the Bank of England therefore charged us interest on those loans.
	We saw massive unemployment, economic distrust that they had inflicted upon us.
	So one of the causes of the American Revolution was the fact that The British Central Bank was trying to force us to borrow money from them at an interest rate.
	And now we have this rise of a gold-backed cryptocurrency.
	So I think Like, we originally had, I guess, we had a sound financial system that worked for many years.
	Repeatedly, the Rothschilds tried to kind of impose a central bank upon us.
	We refused, you know, we allowed it, you know, once the central bank was installed.
	We refused the charter, as you know, during the Rothschilds then finessed the War of 1812 to put us in debt, which then brought back the central bank.
	And then we have the Federal Reserve that appears to have been passed through color of law, with only one member of the House, one member of the Senate, and the President voting on it.
	So I'm not sure how legitimate that authority is, given that the majority of the Senators and Congressmen did not vote for it.
	But the gold standard was established to help us with these international missions.
	It was used to create enough revenue and wealth for us to engage in war in Europe and elsewhere.
	And the reason that we were dragged into war was not that we were trying to fight the Nazis, but this was part of a wider scheme to bring us into the international system, to create debt, to help use our wealth and our manpower to kind of subdue Europe on behalf of these shadowy interests.
	And then as they used our wealth and our manpower, we were forced to go on the gold standard to enable them to continue their globalist designs.
	And when the gold standard no longer worked, we then launched a fiat currency.
	And what has been the response?
	And I've been very disappointed with people like Ron Paul.
	Ron Paul has proposed, oh, we must go back to the gold standard.
	We must do this by way of a cryptocurrency.
	But what you don't hear them say, they never say, why don't we bring back, why don't we allow our government to print our own money instead of having these third parties do it for us?
	And what we're now finding is that the Rothschilds who control the price of gold around the world are behind the gold-backed cryptocurrency.
	And they are using the excuse of international money laundering, international arms trafficking, and human trafficking as an excuse for the banks to therefore know their customer to crack down on the very laundering that they're engaged in.
	And this new currency is supposed to be stable because it's maybe backed by gold.
	But it is, of course, part of this social credit score system that was designed originally by by, but I think I guess Eric Schmidt for China.
	China's technological policy is advised by Bill Gates.
	They intend to bring it here.
	We see kind of early signs of this through Elon Musk, who's trying to create a kind of a digital bank through his Twitter score, where all of your social media will be Okay, great.
	kind of compiled within a file and connected to your financial transactions.
	And then that could be the basis of a potential social credit score that will allow them to disconnect you from commerce.
	And so I think that the direction we're going is potentially very dangerous.
	And I like to see a movement towards restoring the control of our financial system back to the government.
	But of course, in order for that to work, we have to have a government that has integrity.
	And right now, our government appears to lack a lot of legitimacy, for the reasons that we discussed earlier.
	I think you could even describe it as a Rothschild government right now, given this Biden isn't the real Joe, but a puppet.
	Latest reports, I have as many as four different actors that played this role of the present president, and because you don't have a real guy there, no one is responsible.
	So the government can do anything, and no one's going to be held responsible because he died in 2017, by my best calculation.
	Now, you mentioned the death of Diana, and I Years ago, I interviewed an expert on her assassination, and he agreed it was Brent Phillips who directed that she should be taken out by MI6.
	You mentioned a role of Russian intelligence, which surprised me greatly.
	Now, I understand what happened in terms of the sequence of events.
	She survived the crash unscathed.
	She didn't even have any injuries, but they sedated her, put her in an ambulance, and then about 100 yards away from the hospital, they beat her so severely while sedated in the ambulance, she would be unable to survive the internal injuries, and then took her, and she died as a consequence.
	But I didn't understand a role.
	I didn't have a role there for Russian intelligence, FGB.
	I mean, could you elaborate on that?
	This information was provided by agents of the MI5, MI6.
	They said that their intent was just to kind of scare her and to kind of get her to be compliant, to not expose the royal family.
	And they said that the Russians were the more militant and vicious, and they did not want this kind of international money laundering scheme to be exposed.
	And so they were the ones who coordinated the ultimate murder, if you will.
	And I'm not sure of the actual circumstances surrounding the murder.
	I do know she did survive the crash and that the ambulance took a long time in arriving or taking her to the hospital and that she may have either died in transit or died at the hospital.
	I wasn't aware of any beating, but that wouldn't surprise me.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	In the ambulance, they park.
	About 100 yards away from the hospital and then beat her so severely to induce these internal injuries that after they delivered, she would be unsustainable and die in the hospital, seemingly from injuries sustained in the accident, which were basically non-existent.
	She, of course, is doing a campaign against landmines.
	I thought that was wonderful.
	I was a huge fan of Princess Di.
	And, of course, Harry is not an offspring of Charles.
	There's even questions whether William is the offspring of Charles.
	Do you know anything about that?
	We know Hewitt, who is the father of Harry.
	And, you know, I think that was a way in which Diane was protesting against her meaningless marriage, where Camilla, as she observed during interviews, was the third party to the marriage, and where Charles is such a dolt.
	I have no respect for this guy.
	He's virtually retarded.
	You know, he even once wrote to Camilla that he wished she were a tampon, because then he could be inside of her all that.
	I mean, that's bizarre!
	I think that's a level of intellect he exhibits about the equivalent of a tampon.
	Yeah, level of degeneracy where he lives at.
	You're right.
	I think Prince William, I believe, is the son of Juan Carlos, the King of Spain.
	And that might have been one of the reasons why he didn't become king, that you can't have the son of a king of a foreign nation, the head of England.
	I think that was discovered.
	And I think that just to kind of reaffirm what Probably happened to Diana that this was connected to money laundering.
	I discovered from one of your guests that Sir James Goldsmith was her father, her biological father.
	I wasn't aware of that.
	Sir James Goldsmith worked for Walker Slater, which was an asset stripping company with the Rothschilds.
	One of his advisors and partners was Adnan Khashoggi.
	So he would have known about this international money laundering.
	He was very critical of what the Rothschilds were doing.
	He was the head of this anti-EU movement as a member of the European Parliament, where he was trying to take Britain out of the EU, which was a trap for England to destroy the country.
	And I don't know if you saw his interview with Charlie Rose, but he said these free trade agreements are going to be disastrous.
	This was in the 1990s before he died.
	One month before Princess Diana, he was suffering from pancreatic cancer, but he died of a heart attack.
	And he was talking about that these free trade agreements and this quest for money are not advisable at this time.
	He said that they may have worked in the 1980s, 1970s, but he said it makes no sense to destroy nations to get all this money if you're going to destroy the people and the nations that you are meant to serve.
	And he had predicted at that time that there would be a mass migration all over the world that we're seeing today because the elites wanted to control the food supply, the global food supply.
	So the people would be pushed off the farms.
	So you have the agricultural people, you know, farmers pushed into the cities where there's large unemployment.
	And then you have the workers of the world competing against each other to the race to the bottom for the lowest possible wage.
	And he said that what they're planning to do is unsustainable.
	The people will not even be able to afford to live in their own countries.
	And he was very much against it.
	So around the same time that he was coming out with that, this whole scandal around Khashoggi was breaking and then he kind of suddenly dies.
	So that might kind of connect him with, you know, some of those developments.
	You know, as it happens, Greg Hallett is a friend of mine.
	We met in London long ago.
	He's the man who would be king, and I believe he may have a legitimate title.
	He's an expert on the royal family.
	He has a five-volume set.
	I've got it right here about The Hidden King of England, you know, they've tried to suppress it by the royal family because by his argument, the whole Windsor family is illegitimate.
	You have to go back to Queen Victoria and if you trace it, actually Juan Carlos of Spain is a legitimate heir to the throne.
	So that if Juan Carlos is the father of William, that would make William in the line of ascension to the throne.
	Of course, Greg may well be too.
	I mean, I've followed this even with him in some detail.
	But I mean, it's fascinating.
	And now Harry, of course, Maygo and Markham.
	I watched this series, Suits.
	I don't know if you've ever seen this television series about a law firm in New York.
	But Meghan Markle just has a terrific role there.
	It's like with Nicole Kidman.
	I never figured out what Tom Cruise saw in Nicole Kidman until I saw The Die For.
	And she was a sensation.
	I didn't know what Harry saw in Meghan Markle until I saw Suits.
	It's really interesting.
	And of course, Meghan and Harry are rebels.
	You know, they've been basically treated as outcasts by the royal family.
	Do you have any additional thoughts about that before we turn to the most important question I have for you about the role of Vladimir Putin?
	Interesting.
	I have interviewed Greg Hallett a few times, and I think he's an incredible historian.
	I have great respect for him, and I think he's done a phenomenal job at exposing the illegitimacy around the House of Windsor.
	I originally was very open to the idea that he might be a legitimate king, and I don't know one way or the other, ultimately, but I have spoken to a Merovinian who is of that line that is presumed to be the direct descendant of David and therefore potentially of Jesus.
	And he was saying that Jesus did not have any heirs.
	It was impossible because Jesus was entirely celibate.
	So he said that that royal bloodline is potentially illegitimate and is being used as a pretense for these shadow powers to falsely claim the right to rule over humanity by way of Jesus.
	And the one kind of issue that I would have with Greg, and again, I have an incredible amount of respect for him.
	He's an incredible historian.
	It's not against him personally, but he himself had said a couple of things.
	One, that he played a role in the fall of the Berlin Wall, and that in turn makes him a Christ figure, the Messiah, because he has united kingdoms.
	And therefore fulfilled prophecy, but the fall of the Berlin Wall was a ruse conceived by Rothschild to, you know, as to help lay this foundation for the Soviet Union, former Soviet Union and the U.S.
	to converge as part of a global communist regime.
	And then he had also said that Queen Victoria was herself a Rothschild.
	So if she was a Rothschild, and then she in turn had a secret trice with a royal who may have held the Jesus bloodline, That would ensure that that progeny would still be a Rothschild.
	So I think that I know that that Hallett, Greg Hallett, is trying to claim that the throne through that heir, the ultimate descendant, but that ultimate descendant would be a Rothschild.
	And I think Anna von Reitz may have had it right where she said that This error was Plan B. So once the illegitimacy around the royal family was discovered, they would then have the Jesus bloodline.
	That gentleman stepped aside, and then there was Greg Hallett, who fulfilled prophecy, but then according to whom?
	And that was according to the esoteric CIA, he said.
	And the esoteric CIA is still the CIA, which is controlled by Rothschild.
	So I think that Greg Hallett may have been used by the Rothschild as, you know, potentially a puppet of sorts.
	I don't think that that's the role that he intended for himself to be used by, but that was my impression.
	But I would have loved to have seen him as kings.
	I think he had good intentions, and I think he really wanted to restore virtue and integrity to the world.
	So I, you know, I supported him, but I'm not sure that, in my own opinion, that he would be the legitimate king.
	Yeah, my personal thing is to make a wonderful monarch.
	We just got to know each other during a visit to London.
	I've been there seven times.
	And we met late one evening, wound up in a Chinese restaurant around 2 a.m.
	and just hit it off tremendously.
	And I've been friends since.
	We've collaborated on a number of investigations, including of the New Zealand Christ Church.
	Mosque bombings, which were so amateurish, so phony, they just dissolved but were great.
	Grew up in New Zealand.
	Knows the country inside out.
	There have even been multiple attempts to assassinate him.
	We did a thing about New Zealand you can find on my blog at jameshfetzer.org, the 65 shows about the New Zealand shooting.
	I mean, in New Zealand, the video is so phony, it's like a video game, that the government will find you $10,000 if you have a copy of it on your computer.
	How bad is that?
	Talk about the suppression of evidence.
	Now, I think by far, for me, the most important issue you raised had to do with the role of Vladimir Putin and all of the above.
	I have on many occasions expressed my admiration for Putin as the only true statesman to stride the world stage today and as a force for good.
	Now, your take would seriously compromise my interpretation of his role, so I'm just inviting you to elaborate I'm not declaring I'm right, and I'm certainly not declaring you're wrong.
	I'm just interested in getting more information out about what is an absolutely crucial issue to me, given his place, that I regard as the top of the pyramid in terms of relations between nations and the world today.
	Your thoughts?
	Further thoughts?
	Okay, that's a very good question.
	Historically, Russia has been the defender of Christianity and values.
	They wanted to create the third Rome, which would be a new center of Judeo-Christian religion to promote God's kingdom and biblical values throughout the world.
	However, the Rothschilds created a ruse, and remember that they work through proxy.
	They promote Hegelian dialectic, so you have these two opposing forces that may or may not be as they appear, but they serve the purpose of driving the agenda forward.
	Russia is currently part of BRICS.
	The BRICS agenda is aligned with Communist China, which is also controlled by the same hand by the Rothschilds and these shadowy financial interests.
	And their ultimate agenda is to weaken and destroy the dollar.
	Now, this was an agenda that didn't happen overnight.
	It was decades in the making, and it was conceived and promoted by our own people.
	Wall Street and our own government working on behalf of these shadowy interests.
	So I think that Vladimir Putin is part of that same agenda.
	And I think you may want to explore Bill Browder.
	His father was a communist, but recall that communism is a tactic that is employed by Wall Street to take over our government.
	And then once that government is taken over, A sort of free enterprise is established, stability is restored, but within the control of the shadow elite.
	Bill Browder, who was an investor in Russia, he had determined that through his own audits that Vladimir Putin was holding the assets for the Russian oligarchs, that they were serving him by proxy.
	I know that Vladimir Putin was installed at the direction of Larry Summers.
	He was a business partner of Jacob Rothschild.
	He's also a good friend of Jeffrey Epstein.
	And he was part of this economic agenda against the United States.
	I know from working on the Abramoff investigation and from Russia's own media, and I think the media source is CommonSant, I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly, which stated quite a few years ago that Vladimir Putin was working on behalf, he was serving as proxy to Jacob Rothschild.
	So, I think that he is a shadowy agent, and the Russians are behind a lot of criminality.
	They have all this money that has been stolen from different countries, has wound up in their hands a lot of international wealth, and there is a very powerful and ruthless crime syndicate that is centering around Vladimir Putin.
	But I think his rhetoric might kind of confuse the issue because he appears to be somebody who is a defender of nationalism, of country, of the Judeo-Christian principles, who is against the deep state.
	But his attacks on the Anglo-Saxon establishment, he's not challenging the cabal.
	This effort to take down Britain and England traces ultimately to the DVD.
	And what's the DVD?
	The DVD was the secret German intelligence service that was controlled by the Nazis.
	It was once presided over by George H.W.
	Bush, and their goal from the days of Since World War Two has been to collapse England and the United States for the purposes of creating a fourth Reich.
	And this is being done.
	You would say, why would they want to do that?
	Rothschild and these shadowy interests don't work on behalf of the country.
	Rather, they take the resources and the power and the energies of those countries and work through them to amass power for themselves.
	So while they were controlling England, at the same time they wanted to collapse England.
	While they're controlling the United States, they also want to collapse the United States.
	And all of our wealth and power and resources are being kind of sucked up and they're being delivered to them.
	So I think that, unfortunately, Vladimir Putin is a Rothschild agent, and I think his rhetoric and the propaganda around him, the marketing around him, is intended to create the appearance that he is fighting the deep state.
	But that's just part of Hegelian dialectics.
	It's part of a strategy that they're using, in my opinion.
	Well, I believe the whole war in Ukraine has been fought in part because Israel wanted to make Ukraine the new Israel.
	It seemed to me if Putin is a raw child that he would go along with it.
	Why would he resist?
	They were about to launch an all-out slaughter in the Donbass when Russia intervened to prevent that from happening.
	Since the coup of 2014, Victoria Nuland, an engineer with five billion U.S.
	taxpayer dollars to depose the Russia-friendly president and impose a Western puppet of whom Zelensky is a successor.
	You would think Putin would have been more accommodating of this effort rather than, in my opinion, standing tall and resisting it, where Ukraine has been defeated.
	They've lost over 500,000.
	We heard Colonel McGregor revert to that in the opening segment.
	Just elaborate a little more about Russia, Ukraine.
	And Susan, we're hitting a break and I'm going to give out the numbers so everyone can call in.
	in. 608-957-8727. 608-957-8727.
	608-957-8727.
	608-957-8727.
	I'll repeat right after the break.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you. - Management would like
	to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support which has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
	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 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 for the dark world.
	Revolution Radio.
	FreedomSubstance.com.
	The number one listener supported radio station on the planet.
	Revolution.
	- Ready go, ready go, ready go, ready go. - Thank you. - Thank you. - Thank ready go. - Thank you. - Thank you. - Thank
	you. - Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday 8:00 p.m.
	Eastern Time on Studio B for Momentary Zen with host Zen Garcia.
	the people station.
	Even 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 Nuke 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 your host.
	- Thank you. - Well, there's much more for Susan Bradford and me to discuss here, but if you'd like to ask any questions of her or me about any of these subjects or others, the number but if you'd like to ask any questions of her or me about any Remember, and I miss Mitchell,
	He was wonderful being a producer for me, but he has undertaken other projects now, and I miss that guy.
	I'll do my best to get you on the air.
	Susan, let me return to this question about Juan Carlos.
	And his being the actual biological father of William.
	William has always seemed to be kind of a sensible guy.
	He seems to be intelligent.
	He seemed to be well-mannered.
	He seemed to have a presence of mind.
	He has a dignity about him.
	I like Kate a lot, of course.
	I mean, there's quite a backstory there with regard to her.
	And the club killing kittens, you know about that, Susan?
	I did.
	Greg told me.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, there was a myth that each time a woman had an orgasm, a kitten would die so that they were out to kill as many kittens as they could by having as many orgasms.
	Anyway, I find her charming.
	She's beautiful.
	She's got great manner, great sense of style.
	I thought she and William were a great match.
	Now, if indeed Juan Carlos is William's father, then it would seem to me William has a greater claim to the throne of England than does Charles, who's such a mediocrity.
	I find it embarrassing.
	That he was even coronated.
	And of course, as Greg has explained, it wasn't even a proper coronation.
	They don't have the coronation stone and all that.
	I mean, what an amazing story he has to tell.
	I'm just intrigued by what you would think about You know, William versus Charles.
	I would have got Charles out of the scene at the earliest possible moment.
	And Camilla, in my opinion, is an embarrassment.
	She's so tawdry.
	She's so common.
	She is so undignified.
	She is anything but regal.
	And I just find it embarrassing that there she is, Charles.
	Your thoughts?
	I would agree with all of the above.
	I think maybe at this stage in history, I'd rather see maybe no king, because given the power they have over America, I'd like to see us outside the reach and power of the king or queen.
	I think in terms of comparing the two, you made incredible points.
	According to Greg, if I recall correctly, Kate is either a goldsmith or a Rothschild, and so she was actually his handler.
	So if you were to have Prince William as king, you'd have another Rothschild essentially serving on the throne.
	And if he were a king of a foreign country, I wonder whether that would be appropriate for England.
	It has deep ties with the Vatican.
	The Vatican, as you know, is a source of a lot of the problems that we're facing today.
	And Madrid was the location that was established for a Nazi think tank that was promulgating the idea for a fourth Reich over the world.
	And so I think that there might be some problems with, through hate, who might have some of these Rothschild connections.
	But I think that if all factors considered, it would be nice to have William as King.
	He's definitely more regal, and he looks the part.
	I have very little respect for Charles or Camilla.
	Well, if I've handled it right, we have a caller from 408.
	I believe that would be Paul.
	Am I wrong?
	No, it's me.
	All right, join the conversation, my friend.
	Long time.
	Hi, Paul.
	Hi.
	Earlier in the show, at the very beginning of the show, you were talking about the Trump trial, E. Jean Carroll, and I heard you say that she seems to be obsessed with sex.
	Is that right?
	Yeah.
	You have her contact information?
	You want to join the party?
	She's accused five or six others of having raped her.
	She's a fantasist.
	It turns out the claim she made against Trump was the same as the script for a Law & Order episode.
	She's acknowledged that's one of her favorite shows.
	She also liked The Apprentice.
	I think she's just kind of self-obsessed and a sensation seeker.
	And she recently was on with Rachel Maddow just bloating about how she was going to spend Donald Trump's money, Paul.
	I mean, it was very embarrassing.
	But there's no way this woman can be taken seriously.
	This is some kind of joke, sick, sadistic joke and abuse of the legal system.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, I got a laugh out of you.
	I waited an hour and a half to drop that line.
	That's basically a walk-off right there.
	So, I sent you Miles Mathis' paper on this.
	I didn't really need to read it, but it just makes all the key points.
	None of this makes any sense legally, and that's because it's fake.
	It's a fake trial, just like so many others.
	You can be sure that, I mean, Trump is aware that it's a fake trial.
	You know, his participation in it, you know, I suppose it's voluntary.
	Maybe it's required.
	But check out these little connections here, which I'm sure you enjoy, right?
	So this is just part of it.
	It's a six page paper.
	It'll be a quick read for you.
	But the judge, Lewis Kaplan, right?
	Well, E. Jean Carroll's lead attorney is Roberta Kaplan.
	Now, they say that, of course, they're Jewish, right?
	They say they're not related, but get this, right?
	That she, Roberta Kaplan, basically worked with him at the law firm, Paul White.
	That's right, that's right.
	He mentored her and therefore there was a conflict of interest and she should not have been allowed to participate.
	You had to change either the attorney or the judge.
	You couldn't have the combination.
	Let me, let me, okay, let me go on.
	Okay, so her other attorney, maybe you know this, I don't know, her other attorney, Sean Crowley, It is also connected, right?
	And in fact, Judge Kaplan, Lewis Kaplan, performed her wedding.
	Really?
	Married her.
	No, I didn't know this, Paul.
	Go ahead, you're on a roll.
	Well, yeah, I'm just reading this right from the paper here, so I haven't fact-checked this or anything.
	Sure, I got it.
	Again, you know, this is how I look at things right away.
	Again, as I made clear, I've read extensively Of Miles Mathis.
	I've probably read as much Miles Mathis as most people out there, and I don't believe everything he says, and I don't agree with all his points, but I go there right away when the mainstream story doesn't make any sense.
	Yeah.
	And today, in today's world, the mainstream stories don't make any sense, for the most part.
	Yeah.
	They don't make any sense, so you just go there.
	So again, I mean, think about that.
	So she's got this, E. Jean Carroll's got two attorneys, right?
	One, she was mentored by the judge, And the other, this Sean Crowley, was also connected to him, having both clerked for the judge, as well as this Judge Kaplan performed her wedding.
	So, come on.
	I mean, it's just, it's far too much.
	And this idea, okay, $83 million judgment, really?
	For, like, a nearly 30-year-old rape case, where she doesn't remember anything?
	And, you know... Oh, it is absurd.
	It is absurd on his face, Paul.
	There's no doubt about that.
	In fact, there's a new article out, something like 25 reasons why she won't collect a nickel and that this is going to be dismissed.
	There's a new article out there.
	I was called about during the break.
	Well, again, it's not, but it's not real.
	That's the point.
	It can't be real.
	And plus it's mainly a defamation case.
	It doesn't, it's not like she has to prove rape.
	She just basically is trying to prove that he defamed her by denying the rape.
	And of course, the idea that they bring these other women in and let them testify, that's not done in such cases like this.
	If Trump had an actual record of rape or a criminal conviction for rape, then they could bring in this evidence as a propensity for this behavior.
	Kind of like if you're, you know, if you're a serial burglar and you're accused of, you know, burgling a house, they could say, well, look, and he's burgled all these other houses, right?
	But they just can't bring in women and say, oh yeah, He does these sorts of things all the time.
	That's normally not going to be allowed in a case like this.
	There's many other of, you know, what you would call these legal anomalies that, again, don't add up.
	So my contention is, and I'm sure it's not going to be that hard for you to believe, that it's fake, fake, fake.
	There's no real money going to change hands.
	It's just a show trial.
	Like so much else that's being done out there.
	Well, see, it's got to do with the meaning of the word fake.
	I mean, you know, it's not a legitimate trial.
	It's not a legitimate charge.
	It's not a legitimate finding.
	I agree with all that.
	But I do believe Trump was hauled into court totally illegitimately.
	I mean, it was a Democrat plot.
	They actually had the Well, okay, let me ask you this, all right?
	Is Trump not an actor?
	Was he not on TV?
	to file because the case had expired the statute of limitations.
	But if you're saying that, you know, it's a theatrical event, meaning these are all actors and there's no real judge and no real attorneys, I'm not so sure I go that far, Paul, but I think you are.
	Well, okay, let me ask you this, all right?
	Is Trump not an actor?
	Was he not on TV?
	Did he not appear in movies?
	I mean, that's what we're talking about in this particular production and whether this is a role.
	Okay, but I'm not done.
	Let me just finish my sentence.
	How about Alex Jones?
	Do you think that was, did he really show up to a real courtroom or was there a real trial where, you know, he got a judgment against him for nearly a billion dollars?
	Do you think that was real?
	Well, Robert Barnes, who was in there, said it was unlike any jury trial they'd ever seen.
	There were three cameras in there, one focusing on the jury, thought it was a made-for-TV movie.
	And I agree, I don't think Alex will ever pay a nickel.
	And by the way, I got a report from an insider who was involved in Sandy Hook, someone at the high level in orchestrating Saying they felt it had been a great success with Alex, because people now aren't talking about Sandy Hook and denying.
	Of course, that's my effort to get it out there.
	I don't know if you saw my interview with SGT Report, where I was talking about my interaction with several of the participants in the event.
	The woman who was cast as Emily Parker, and the woman who played the role of Vicky Soto.
	And also, I explained how Noah Posner was fabricated.
	And of course, it was the supposed father, Noah Posner, who brought the lawsuit against me and is now saying that the whole thing with Alex Jones' work, because it's had the suffocating effect, that was the idea.
	But I agree with you that there are an awful lot of fabricated.
	How much of this even has any legitimacy at all?
	I think that's a really good question, Paul.
	I'm not upset at all by making those assertions because they may very well be true.
	Okay, well, all right, again, I didn't want to re-encapsulate the whole case again, but just think about this.
	Things that you already believe, Jim, things that you already are convinced of, such as the fake Joe Biden, right?
	Multiple different Joe Bidens.
	Yeah.
	The fake double for Hillary Clinton, right?
	Yeah.
	The fake White House, the White House-set presidency.
	Yeah.
	And on and on and on.
	So therefore, how far-fetched is it that they could have a trial in a courtroom, right?
	I mean, they could rent a courtroom, and these intel agencies, these deep state operatives, whatever it is, whoever is running the show, because we all know the politicians don't run the show, okay?
	Joe Biden doesn't run the show, all right?
	So they could just make a courtroom trial that's not real, even though people could go to court and see a trial if they wanted to.
	but it's not a reel.
	It's a production.
	That's my opinion.
	Yeah, even though the media would present it as real, but that's just what they did with Sandy Hook.
	You know, the media were in Newtown.
	Paul, the media were in Newtown before the event occurred.
	They were there the weekend before the Yolanda shooting to be able to cover it on the spot.
	I mean, it's that bad.
	So they all knew.
	They were all complicit in the whole damn thing.
	I mean, it's just embarrassingly bad.
	So you're making a good point, Paul.
	I like your argument.
	And they used the real elementary school, right?
	Didn't they?
	No, it wasn't even an elementary school.
	It was a special needs school.
	They just put the word elementary on it.
	Look at all the signs.
	They say Sandy Hook School.
	And get this, it was actually closed in 2006.
	And Eric Holder came down to Newtown and offered the community $150,000.
	$14 or $140 million to do this, and the community agreed.
	Families who didn't want to be a part of it moved out of Newtown.
	This took years.
	They had non-disclosure agreements.
	They had auditions for roles.
	They have benefits.
	Get this, Paul.
	Residual benefit if you participated in the Sandy Hook hoax.
	You don't pay taxes, and you get free college.
	I mean, can you believe it's that bad?
	Of course, and you know, this is the wildest thing, and I'm sorry, Susan, I don't mean to leave you out of it, and I'll stop talking.
	That's okay.
	Yeah, see, this is a problem that most people have a difficult time believing, is the length that they will go to to construct a false reality for us.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So that's where I'm coming from on all this stuff.
	I don't believe for a second that this trial with Trump is real, or that he's a TV character.
	You know, again, you can read the paper I sent to you, and you can make up your own mind, but I think you're already leaning that way.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	You got me halfway convinced.
	Listen, Paul, what does Miles Mathis think about the disappearance of Lloyd Austin and reappearance?
	Because, you know, I still believe he was blown into little pieces in Kiev on the 3rd of January.
	What's Miles think?
	I have not seen any work on that yet.
	In other words, I check the site once or twice a week.
	Sometimes a couple weeks go by, but once or twice a week I check the site for new papers.
	And as of today, there's no paper on Lloyd Austin, but that may come once, you know, later.
	Yeah, well, Paul, I'm just delighted to have you here.
	So you're glad to expand, you know, I mean, with the loss of Mitchell, you know, the whole call thing is a little different now.
	And I'm just pleased to get you on because you always have a lot to say and agree or disagree.
	I always find it engaging.
	I mean, I'm always glad when you call.
	Even if we have a strenuous disagreement.
	Go ahead, Paul.
	Give us further thoughts about what's going on in the world today.
	Thank you for saying that.
	I really always appreciate that.
	I appreciate you and all the work you've done.
	I was going to say to Susan, I wish I could have heard you better.
	It was difficult.
	I don't know if you were on a speakerphone or what was going on, but it was Difficult to make out, but I did hear what I call the broad outline of what you painted as far as the picture of the way the world works, and I mostly agree with everything I heard.
	There's an audio adjustment.
	I have Susan on with Zoom, and then we're broadcasting audio, and there's an audio adjustment I have to make to get the Zoom volume up high enough, and I had it set properly, but somehow I just now verified it when you made that point, and it had slipped back a bit, so she could have been heard more clearly had I had that setting where I intended it and originally set it.
	Susan, go ahead and say more to Paul.
	Thank you, Paul.
	I apologize for that.
	I know that there's been a lot of kind of maybe some technical interference on my side.
	I think my connection to Jim electronically has been a little bit sketchy today, so I apologize that you couldn't hear me, but I appreciate the kind thoughts.
	It's always good to hear from you.
	No big deal.
	I'm sure it wasn't your fault, but the way it sounds to me, what I've heard before, it sounds like you're Like you're some distance away from a speakerphone and there's a lot of, uh, you know, uh, like a echo off of the wall or something.
	That's kind of the way it sounded for the most part.
	You can, you can listen back later on and confirm it, but yeah, it was, it was a difficult to pick up everything you say, but yeah, like I said, I, I got, I got quite a bit, especially your work about the, the money system and the Roth trials and the gold standard, and this is all, You know, it's unfamiliar to a lot of people, but it's very familiar to me.
	And that's the other fake thing about our world, is we live in a fake money system with a fake banking system where they don't loan anything.
	They just give you debits and credits.
	And I remember just the other day talking to a friend of mine in real estate, and he knows in general, I think, I'm not sure if he has the particular working knowledge that I might have, or you might have, this fractional reserve, fictional reserve banking system.
	Asking him, like, for example, I asked him if he saw the movie The Big Short, which is a great movie.
	And he said he had, but it'd been a while.
	And I said, well, if you remember, you know, they were, they were buying and selling all these loans.
	And there was always people in many cases, just like today, are not actually paying the original lender, but they're paid some other bank or what you call a service company.
	And that's because their loan has been sold.
	And in many times, in many cases, it's very, very discounted from the original amount.
	So I asked him, I said, so for example, let's say a bank loaned $100,000 on a house, and later on, they're going to decide to sell it for 40.
	Well, why would they do that if they actually were out the $100,000 that they claimed they loaned?
	It doesn't make any sense, right?
	Why would you take that kind of a loss?
	And of course, the reason is, is they never actually loaned the $100,000.
	They just basically credited, you know, the buyer, the seller's account, or the builder's account, So, you know, they're basically selling pieces of paper for cash when they decide to get rid of the loan rather than just wait for it to pay out over 20 or 30 years.
	So this is the kind of kind of world we live in.
	Most people don't know.
	Well said.
	You have any thoughts about the Super Bowl forthcoming, Paul, since you're into sports betting and all that?
	You know, I have not made my mind up, but I'm not sure I will, because to me, it's either going to be one of two things that's going to occur.
	Either they have a narrative, in other words, a script or a narrative that's already planned, or they're going to make sure that the big money bets get covered.
	So to me, I don't trust it.
	I'm going to watch it with interest and see what happens.
	And it looks like so far, all the big money's coming in on Kansas City.
	Which would mean that they don't want Kansas City to pay out, so therefore the 49ers could win.
	However, if there's some kind of a script or something, because of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelsey and all that nonsense, and they want Kansas City to win, they could stay with the script.
	So, as you know, these big stand-alone events, I don't trust.
	In general, no.
	Most NFL games are legit.
	You can tell by the way they're played.
	Very good, Paul.
	That was a very discerning observation.
	And what is this story with this Taylor Swift stuff?
	I mean, it's peculiar to me.
	My daughter and son-in-law are big fans of Taylor Swift, but why she should be involved in politics is beyond me.
	Could you comment?
	Well, I don't really know any other than what I've read and heard.
	You know, there's lots of speculation about it.
	Is it a real relationship?
	Is it like one of these fake kind of Hollywood put-up relationships?
	Is it indeed being used to draw more fans or to expand the fan base of the NFL?
	Those are legitimate points.
	All we know is what they say.
	So they say, for example, that Taylor Swift has brought a whole segment of fans that would otherwise not be that into any NFL games.
	But so, you know, they're always looking to do that, right?
	To increase their ratings and to increase their advertising revenues.
	So you never know, right?
	I mean, and Chris Kelsey has done a whole lot more, a lot of these commercials now, supposedly.
	Yeah.
	He's got a $20 million, $20 million contract for Pfizer.
	Yeah, I think he's, yeah, he's promoting the jab for God's sake.
	How awful is that?
	That's just terrible, Paul.
	Terrible.
	Yeah.
	And he's, and he's already, he's already doing other commercials.
	Like for example, those commercials for Allstate and he's got some other endorsements too.
	So somebody has decided to, you know, make him, a wider star than just being an NFL tight end.
	And he apparently is going along with it, so therefore it's not to be trusted.
	- Yeah.
	- I mean, anybody that's a shill for these vaccines is disgusting.
	- Yeah. - I mean, he has to know if he's looked into it and maybe he has not looked into it.
	I don't know.
	Well, just watch two beaters die suddenly, and you get the idea.
	Susan, would you care to comment on any of these issues?
	I don't know if you're following this Swift thing, and her boyfriend in the NFL plays for the 49ers.
	He's become a... No, the Kansas City Chiefs.
	The Chiefs.
	He's become a big...
	Promoters appearing in advertising for Pfizer products and others.
	I mean, are you aware of any of that?
	I knew that the NFL, like Brady, was sponsoring the cryptocurrencies, and that didn't end well for them either.
	Remember that Bitcoin?
	I think they were with Sandbank, and Freed, and Binance, and FTX, where they were promoting these different cryptocurrencies that turned out to be very fraudulent.
	So I guess the NFL are kind of used as spokespeople and heroes for these different products.
	Susan, Paul wanted clarification.
	You're saying NFL is promoting cryptocurrency?
	It was.
	Remember Gisele, the model, and I think her boyfriend Brady, something or other, they were promoting Binance.
	And we had Mark Cuban and Mr. Wonderful from Shark Tank, Kevin O'Leary, And they were promoting the different cryptocurrencies with the NFL players.
	So, I'm not surprised to see that.
	I'll have to keep it up with that.
	Well, let me know if Miles comes out with anything on Lloyd Austin.
	That would interest me greatly, Paul, because I'm convinced he was blown into little pieces in Kiev.
	And yet we have him appearing at a press conference.
	And unless it's a hologram, I've got to be wrong.
	So I'm prepared to be wrong.
	I just want to know, am I wrong?
	Because the whole theory they were given, the explanation for why he was out of communication, was frankly absurd.
	And from a practical point of view, impossible that the Secretary of Defense not at all time 24-7 be in contact with his superiors and his subordinates.
	It's just not something that could be allowed to happen.
	So I'd be intrigued if Miles has a take on it, Paul.
	And I'm real happy with your call.
	I think this was just perfect.
	I'm pleased.
	Thank you.
	I'm glad.
	Okay, well thanks!
	I've never had a call described as perfect before, but okay, I'll take it!
	I second that motion!
	And Susan, I'm just delighted you could come on today.
	And your independence as a journalist is fascinating because you give us an angle that no one else is presenting.
	Is there anyone out there who's even close to how you're assessing these things?
	I mean, that you feel is a kindred spirit?
	That's a good question.
	I really don't, but I try to follow the money and the evidence rather than read the spin.
	And the evidence is what it is.
	Susan Bradford, thank you.
	Paul, wonderful call.
	Spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends, the people you love and care about, because we do not know how much time we have left.
	Thanks for being here.
	Have a great weekend.
	All right.
	Well, thank you very much, Jim.

▲