All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 12, 2024 - Jim Fetzer
59:11
Truth vs. NEW$ Inc, Part 1 (11 February 2024) with Don Grahn, Scott Bennett, and Brian Davidson
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome, folks!
This is Truth Vs. News, and this is February 11, 2024.
And this is Super Bowl Sunday.
All kinds of things are happening.
I understand there might even be more happening than what we want on Super Bowl Day, because I hear rumors that there might be an emergency broadcast afterwards.
And then tomorrow is the 12th of February, which is Abraham Lincoln's 215th anniversary since he's been born.
He's known as Honest Abe.
Can we say that we have an Honest Joe in the office right now?
I don't think so.
I think we got a big mess and I think we're about ready to discuss it along with Tucker Carlson, who's been with Putin, but let's introduce the crew first.
So we got Jim Fetzer, who's the author of many books and the man of the hour, man of the year.
This book on Nobody Died at Sandy Hook is a forbidden book.
It's probably the most interesting and historically accurate book you'll ever find, plus the American nukes on 9-11.
Wow, this is a complete details that you won't find anywhere else.
And JFK, who done it?
And this brings back, and that's still unresolved after 60 years.
So anyway, and we have Scott Bennett, who is the man of the year, I'd say, an ambassador to And doing all kinds of good PR work internationally.
And we have Brian Davidson, our private investigator, who really keeps his nose to the soil and keeps working to dig up real stories.
So we've got a story today, a different story, doing a little different today.
We're going to be talking about Tucker Carlson and Putin and other things that are really of interest to you.
So bring it on, Jim.
Well, let me just add, Don, don't forget Valentine's Day, the 14th.
Take that person out to dinner.
Treat them with love and kindness, because remember, we do not know how much time we have left.
That's right.
Meanwhile, Tucker and Putin sat down for a fascinating two-hour interview.
Fox is the most watched cable network with an average of 1.85 million, MSNBC averaging 1.2, CNN only 58,000.
Tucker's interview is over 50 million within the first five hours of mainstream media is dead.
What went before was a feint to circumvent censors, I now believe, because the real Tucker Booth interview is completely different and far more historical and detailed, and it's flimsy precursor.
I thought Booth was masterful, and it was a professor and his student.
Scott and I had gone through the earlier version of the transcript line by line.
Offering our interpretation and critique, it was an historic event Western reporters, including the U.S., have all but blackballed the president of Russia lest he dispel their demonization.
Here we have Paul Craig Roberts.
Those questions were on the sophomoric side.
Tucker did a good thing by giving us two hours of how Putin thinks.
The neoconservative warmongers and shills for the armament industry are angry because Putin did not present as they portrayed him in the evil aggressor out to conquer Europe.
What comes across from Carlson's interview with Putin is that Putin remains a captive after all the betrayals and deception he suffered of the ideal of reaching an agreement with the West.
He discounts Washington's insistence on its hegemony.
The fact doesn't fit with Putin's idealistic approach to international relations.
Putin still hopes sanity and goodwill will emerge in the West.
His idealism blocks him from proactive actions, which he regards as provocative.
He has yet to accept his tolerance of Western aggression, encourages more aggression, and thus continues to frustrate the emergence of the cooperative, multi-polar world he envisions.
I don't think we're going to get a mutual defense treaty between Russia, China, and Iran.
That would cause Washington's neoconservatives to accept reality and give up their goal of American domination.
Watch the interview.
It'll help to free you from propaganda, keeping you in the matrix.
My concern remains.
Putin's reasonableness will continue to be taken advantage of by Washington until the conflict Putin seeks to avoid becomes unavoidable.
Here is Well, the interview heard around the world is over.
Tucker Carlson has sat down with Russian President Vladimir Putin for over two hours.
They conducted a much-anticipated interview that probably didn't go the way that anybody envisioned it to go.
Let's first of all give credit where credit is due.
This interview would not have occurred if it weren't for Tucker Carlson, for his brand, for his persistence, and, frankly speaking, for his professionalism.
His reputation got him into the Kremlin, got him We should also give credit to the Russian President for being willing to sit down and engage in this dialogue.
Was it everything it could have been?
No.
Tucker Carlson is an interviewer.
He's not a Russian expert.
He's not a Russian historian.
He's not somebody who's versed in the complexities of Russian life.
Vladimir Putin is a Russian president.
He is a man who knows Russian history.
He knows the Russian soul.
And if you listen to this interview, You would know that this was very much a tour de force, where the Russian president was introducing an American audience to the nuances of Russian history, and to the complexities of the Russian soul.
And if you don't understand Russian history, and you don't understand the Russian soul, then you're basically on a journey without a map.
And I think that's the value of this interview.
Because Tucker Carlson doesn't have a map.
Tucker Carlson, though, had the courage to set forth on the journey.
And in a conversation with the Russian president that was maybe less a dialogue and more of a monologue, the Russian president helped create a map.
A map that guided not only Tucker Carlson, but every American viewer through the complexities of what makes Russia tick.
And you have to understand this if you're to understand the issues that confront Russia and the West today.
Let's be clear.
Russian President Vladimir Putin didn't provide any groundbreaking information.
Almost everything he said has already been said before in one way or another.
But what he What he did do is provide this information in a context that was approachable by an American audience.
And this is the value of this interview.
This really isn't about the content, although there is some interesting information that came out.
This is about the process.
Tucker Carlson opened a door into modern-day Russia, opened a door into the personality of Vladimir Putin.
Opened a door into the history of Russia.
Opened a door into the Russian soul.
And because of the answers provided by Vladimir Putin to the questions, or sometimes just the statements made by Vladimir Putin unprompted,
The building blocks necessary for an individual, an American citizen, willing to take the time and effort to learn about Russia, to learn about how Russia got into the situation it is, how Russia interacts with the West, what Russia is thinking about, the building blocks are there.
And somebody who wants to will be able to construct A solid foundation upon which we begin to move forward, and this is what makes this interview so valuable.
Not because in and of itself it solves anything, it's solved nothing, but because it is the beginning of a process.
You know, the genius of Tucker Carlson isn't so much in his interviewing skill, it's what he's going to do after the interview.
He is now created a process where he can go back and talk about the interview to an American audience.
This is his genius, his ability to interface with Americans.
And he now has the ammunition, the words of the Russian president spoken to him in a setting that was historic, in an environment that was, you know, just invigorating.
We don't know how many millions of people have watched this interview or how many millions of people Who will eventually watch this interview.
What we do know is that this is one of the most important interviews of the modern era.
Because this interview has the ability to stop the West and Russia from going to war.
To stop the West from committing suicide.
All of the answers to all of the problems that face Russia and the West today were laid out by the Russian President.
There's no hidden agenda.
There's no, you know, secret code that has to be known.
You just have to know Russia.
You have to understand what makes Russia tick.
You have to understand the thinking behind the Russian President's decisions.
The motives behind Russia.
You have to understand Russia.
I don't think Tucker Carlson understood Russia going into this interview.
And I don't know if he understands Russia coming out of this interview.
But I do know this.
Tucker Carlson's one hell of a journalist, and Tucker Carlson knows that he was given a toolbox, complete with tools, and now he has to go out and finish the job.
Today was just the start.
There's a lot of work to be done, but even the most difficult journeys begin with the first step.
And what Tucker Carlson did today in sitting down and presenting this interview with the Russian President Vladimir Putin to the American people, to the West, to the world, is that most important first step on a journey that can save humanity.
Well, the... I liked it.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, I liked it.
Some parts I didn't like.
I would have done things a little bit differently if I was both Putin as well as if I was Tucker.
If I was Putin, and I think this afflicts Putin and the Russians, they are constantly referencing that they do not get involved in domestic politics, that they, you know, shy away from that and, you know, they avoid it.
And I think that's a terrible mistake because That may work within Russian sensibilities, but it doesn't work within Western, specifically American sensibilities.
You have to speak in the language of your adversary in order to communicate ideas into your adversary.
So in a sense, one of the things Putin could have and should have done is say to Tucker, you know, here's the American identity.
Here's the American character.
Here's what we admire.
Here's what the world admires.
Here's what we've seen in 200 years.
And interestingly enough, Russia in the original days of the American relationship We're very positive and supportive towards America's independence from Britain.
As America went, so did the republics of the Donbass.
They simply affirmed their independence because they were being annihilated.
And your founding fathers did the same thing.
I think it's an extraordinary missed opportunity to fail to articulate that analogy, that metaphor, that figurative translation into what Has occurred in the Donbass to what has occurred in American history.
Because again you're looking to block their shots and score your own points in the same maneuver.
So Putin fails to remind Americans who they really are.
And that leaves Americans, you know, who are halfwits and retards and dumb as a bag of rocks who don't watch our show, it leaves them, you know, in the middle of nowhere because the only identity they're getting is from the Biden Democrats and mainstream media and that identity
...is cut off your balls, tape your breasts, take hormone blockers, eat bugs, worship the environment, be scared of your own shadow, hate yourself in the reflection of toxic masculinity, and serve purple-haired, angry, bulldyke Karens.
This is the hell on earth which Democrat, liberal, schizophrenic insanity is trying to make mainstream culture in America.
So that's why Americans need to be reminded of who they are.
On Tucker's side, where he failed, yeah it was sophomoric, he doesn't have the intellectual rigor, he doesn't have the depth, he's never been in the military, he's never been in government, he's never had a clearance, he's never done anything in the real sharp machinery of government political intelligence operations.
I have.
You have.
Ritter has.
McGregor has.
But Carlson hasn't.
But that's okay.
He is a journalist, as Ritter said.
And he is a good one.
He articulates and distills and presents into packaged slogans and soundbites digestible morsels for the average false teeth-wearing, you know, babified American.
Not referencing false teeth, but again, Americans are Very challenged, and I would say, nutritionally, what's a good word?
Starving.
They're missing a lot of this intellectual stuff.
So, Tucker could have been a lot more Mr. President.
America seems to be going through the same thing that Crimea went through, specifically 25 governors standing behind Abbott, the invasion, the same invasion that happened to Europe.
How is this all going to lead?
See, there was no predictive Analytics that were put into the mix.
It was all reflection.
It was, here's some papers on Russian history that date back to the 800s, which are very good, very important.
And Tucker just kind of looked, he had that annoying look on his face like, Oh, it always does that and it bothers the heck out of me because it's just so ugly.
But there was no predictive analytics into where is this going?
Who's going to do what?
When are they going to do it?
What are the different parties going to do?
How are they going to synergize?
How are they going to separate?
What's going to occur in the Middle East with Qatar and Kuwait and United Arab Emirates and Iran and Iraq and Yemen and Syria and Turkey.
You know, it was an opportunity for Tucker to really be enriched, you know, intellectually, mentally on a knowledge base.
From an absolute brilliant historian and strategic thinker and intelligence analysis analyst and lawyer and other things that Putin represents.
And Tucker didn't do that.
He didn't explore knowledge with Putin.
He didn't relax and really let the conversation ebb and flow.
And that's a sign of a weak man.
That's the sign of a scared man.
And Tucker is scared and he is weak on certain levels.
So I'm not beating him up.
I'm just simply saying for our audience and our purposes, we have to be more intelligent, more efficient, more skilled than Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin, if we are going to navigate and survive, out of the current slow freeway crash that we're on.
Finally, when Ritter references the Russian soul, that's exactly spot on.
And that's where Americans and Europeans fail to understand that the Russian soul has been created in the crucible of war.
I was told by Russians when I was over there, Scott, Russians know war better than any other people.
It's because they've been at war for 500,000 years.
And that's what Putin articulated.
They've been at war with Genghis Khan.
They've been at war with Napoleon.
War with Hitler.
War with the West.
In Serbia.
In Yugoslavia.
This is nothing new.
But in any case, it was good and it was delightfully refreshing to see the mainstream media and half of these politicians, including Bill Kristol, that little mushroom troll that ought to be crucified and skinned alive after due process of law for all of his antics getting us into the Iraq War.
It's always refreshing to see them squirm and squeal like the pigs they are after Tucker Carlson did his interview.
So, overall, I'd applaud him.
It's a very positive thing.
And more of them need to occur.
Jim?
Brian?
Well, I appreciate Tucker Carlson having made the effort.
I don't think it's going to change any of the Americans' style or approach because I think we're desperately headed into these wars to prop up the economy.
All it's going to do is make the American citizens understand Russia a little bit better.
But to be honest, Scott's right.
American citizens don't even understand American history.
How many of them do you think are out there that get their history from other than TikTok and YouTube and anything else?
If we understood our own history, we'd be able to have an internal dialogue with our politicians.
We'd be able to have our own journalists and reporters asking tough questions of our leaders.
We don't.
I appreciate Tucker Carlson heading over there to try to understand Vladimir Putin and help the Americans understand Vladimir Putin, but we don't understand ourselves.
We've forgotten.
Our grandparents have not taught us.
Our great-grandparents have not taught us.
We've lost the ability to have a dialogue with our neighbors.
We've lost the ability to have dialogues with each other.
We all sit in front of our internet, in front of our television, on our couch, where it's comfortable, and nobody... We're at war with our own families, our brothers and sisters and mothers, and nobody sits down to solve problems anymore.
That's important.
Look at all the wars that we're fighting.
Look at all the wars that we've seeded.
We've got this China-Taiwan thing that we're involved with.
We've got Iran.
We've got the Houthis.
We've got Israel.
We've got Russia and Ukraine.
And where is the dialogue?
Where are the people talking?
Where is it being reported?
We're fools.
We eat pudding and think it's vegetables.
We're fools.
At least this was a lesson in diplomacy to all Americans that there is a time to sit down and talk things out prior to bringing out your guns and your weapons.
That, to me, was the big takeaway.
We tend to go to our guns and our weapons because we don't give a damn about understanding our neighbor.
We don't give a damn about understanding what's going on.
We're just absorbed in ourselves, lost in this emptiness.
And I mean that when I say lost.
Are you lost?
Sometimes I feel lost.
I'll bet other nations feel lost.
Everybody's coming through the borders.
The whole world is about to be set aflame.
Our currency is about to have a terrible, a terrible day.
And we're lost because we have no dialogue.
I believe the most important takeaway is the circumstances that led Russia to have to intervene in Ukraine on the one hand, and that Russia has no territorial aggression toward NATO or any other nation, which means the Western desire for war has no rationale.
Not that the West isn't going to persevere in spite of it, but I think that's why they were so upset.
Yeah.
Let me just say this too, Jeremy.
Real quick, Jim.
People should watch that interview with the sound turned off when Putin speaks and replies because you will watch his facial expressions and learn something about the man you will not learn otherwise.
Watch him very closely with the sound turned off and you see his mannerisms and his facial contortions and his demonstrations In a way that I haven't seen in any, he's usually very guarded, but in this interview, he let some things explosively come out that people may not have caught, but you see his facial when he demonstrates five, five times they've advanced NATO.
You get a glimpse of just how pissed off the Russians are for all of the deception that was imposed against them since 1992.
Very good.
Very good.
Meanwhile, in the wake of Tucker's controversial interview, tensions rise as Democrats blame him, a traitor, for engaging with the Russian president.
This poll aims to gauge public sentiment on whether viewers align with the Democrats' stance, questioning whether such dialogue should be perceived as treacherous or merely part of journalistic inquiry into global affairs.
I clicked I don't, and it did not register.
I participated in many of these polls.
They did not want recorded the overwhelming positive reaction of the American people to Tucker's interview.
Meanwhile, U.S.
press, for the most part, seemed to be largely ignoring the interview.
This AOL from Reuters seems about the only thing that they have reported.
Putin says a swap deal to free WSJ reporter Gershkovich might be possible.
The New York Post had its version of the same story.
Putin claims deal could be reached for imprisoned WSJ reporter Evan Gershkovich in rare interview with Tucker Carlson.
Russia's Federal Security Service alleged the reporter, under instruction from the U.S., collected information constituting state secrets about the activities of one of the enterprises of the Russian military-industrial complex.
Gershkovich and the Journal deny the allegations.
The U.S.
government declared him to be wrongfully detained.
Russian authorities haven't released any evidence about Yevgenyov's charges, but in fact, Putin said quite deliberately he was gathering classified information without authorization, which is by definition espionage, and he's got it right.
Meanwhile, Vladimir pulls a classic power move, steamrolling Tucker Carlson.
Tucker said Vladimir was a couple hours late, making him wait as a power move often used by the Russian president.
He launched into a lengthy, revisionist history of Russia that Tucker said annoyed him, They're treating him as though he were an idiot, meaning Tucker.
He might as well be the old union of Soviet writers.
More informative here, Tucker risked bogus prosecution under the Espionage Act for interviewing Russian President Vladimir Putin, one legal expert warrants.
Carlson, a former Fox host who remains popular among conservatives—he is overwhelmingly the most popular journalist in America, if not the world—is set to interview Putin.
He said he's interviewing Russia's leader because most Americans are not informed about what's happening there and that it's his duty to inform people, but the interview has brought a backlash from critics.
I follow Tucker pretty closely.
I've never once heard him advance what could be qualified as a Kremlin talking point.
He has made points the Kremlin has also made because they're important and they're relevant, but not because they're talking points, which is intended to imply they're propaganda.
Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine or what his goals are now.
They've never heard his voice.
That's wrong.
Americans have the right to know all they can about the war in which we are implicated.
We have a right to tell them because we are Americans, too.
...is taking a risk by interviewing Putin, where Ian Corzine said in a video, with his analysis, drawing some pushback.
He said, while interviewing Putin may be legal, there could be big problems ahead for Tucker, pointing to the super broad language of the Espionage Act, which prohibits Americans from spying on behalf of foreign countries.
Khazin warned the language could be construed to prohibit any sharing of information with another country with the intent to harm the U.S.
Obviously not a motive here.
Tucker's sharing information with Putin's team before the interview, which, of course, is routine in setting it up.
Our mootency to provide the American with evidence supporting the war with Ukraine could be covered by the Espionage Act, but it would explain why the case for prosecution would still be weak.
Does Tucker have any intent to harm the U.S.?
This is where the espionage case against Tucker gets weaker and even more weak when you consider the U.S.
government is duty-bound to follow the dictates of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press, and the Supreme Court has done everything it can to protect this provision and journalists.
He said Tucker has ultimately taken a risk.
Newsweek reached out to Tucker for comment.
Corzine's analysis has gone viral, amassing over a million views.
Critics argue the interview will be covered by the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, that is very alarming.
You know, Corzine's comments on the law, that the law can be reinterpreted, misinterpreted, to say any information cannot be shared if it's intended to harm the United States.
That's almost akin to Fauci saying, we're not going to allow information that could harm the science, right?
Harm science.
There's an arrogance and a delusion in conflating the safety, the harm of the United States with sharing of information, with discussing ideas, discussing information, discussing history.
Tucker, again, Tucker Carlson is not a military person, he's not a government person, he does not have a clearance, so he is not in possession of any single thing that could cause harm to the United States.
He is not in a position for that material, so anything he says or does or believes or talks about is as a free citizen, just like your Aunt Bessie Sue in Sioux City, Iowa, or your Uncle Jack in Alaska, or any other person you may know.
Well, I think this is going to happen.
That information can't be shared with anyone because it may harm the United States.
That's the slippery slope we go down if you have people like Corzine and others thinking that the law could be reinterpreted to say that Tucker Carlson could be prosecuted.
For having a conversation and sharing information that harms the United States?
No information that a private citizen has, that a private citizen discusses, no subject, no topic whatsoever, ...is allowed to be stopped or interfered with or shut down by law, by the government, by the prosecutors and jails and the entire court system.
No American citizen's information, whether it harms or helps, The United States is subject to interference or restraint.
That is the heart of the Constitution of the United States of America, for the United States of America.
And all of these reactions to Tucker tell me the old wineskin and the old wine is bursting.
We're bursting because we have become old and feeble and long in the tooth and failed to understand what the Constitution truly is, failed to understand what our rights are, failed to understand what speech is.
Speech is not just sitting and spouting your own opinion.
Fools and weak minds do that, especially if they, like little birds, suck down the worms that the mainstream media give them.
That's what most fools do, and they get hostile when they run out of that script, and they're actually challenged by thinkers to say, well, what do you really think about that?
Where do you get that?
Most people don't have that depth and they just get angry and shrug it off.
That's the real sign of a retarded society.
Regurgitated plastic slogans from mainstream media.
But ask them to articulate it, they can't.
So, this is the walkaway, Jim.
Are they, are the government, are the Congress, are actors, are people like Bill Kristol, or is anyone in a government, intelligence, political office going to try and violate Tucker's right to the freedom of speech, to speak with anyone on planet Earth, and thereby Americans' rights.
Every American citizen has a right to go over and talk to Putin.
Hell, if I go over again, I will be more than happy to sit down with Vladimir Putin.
I don't talk about anything secured or clearance oriented, but I have a right to talk to him and anyone else I want.
So does Tucker Carlson.
So does Jim, Don, Brian, anyone else watching the show.
So that's the real thing to watch, Jim, is Are they going to try and scaremonger and, you know, try and turn this corner?
I don't think they could get away with it, and it would only quicken what I think is inevitably coming, and that is a slow burn revolution in this country like we've never seen before, because there's new wine and a new wineskin coming, and that is the United Republics of America.
the United Republics of America.
Jim?
Brian?
Well, we know that the powers that be here in the United States went after Donald Trump because he was a threat to their power.
He was a threat to their power with his rallies.
He was a threat to their power in terms of his ability to make appointments.
He's been a threat to their power for a long time.
Now, the problem is Donald Trump is the enemy of these people because he adds color to a situation that they want us to see it in black and white.
Think about how simplistic and stupid the idea of Black Lives Matter is.
It's mindless drivel.
Add a little bit of color to the painting and everything changes when you begin to understand the nuance that changes things.
The problem with the American people understanding nuance is that we might start to open our mouths and criticize those that lead us.
That is a major problem for the powers that want to break our society into pieces.
They want to keep us divided into left and right, black and white, cops and robbers, parents and children, up and down.
They want to keep us divided, and by dividing us, it makes us weak.
So having an internet that continually allows a dialogue to take place that continues to allow Jim Fetzer to talk on air about Sandy Hook and Brian Davidson and Scott Bennett and all the rest of us to do it is a threat to them.
Now if they're going to go after Tucker Carlson it's because Vladimir Putin gave him a gray binder at the end of the meeting.
Now what was in that binder?
I guarantee you That the powers that be wanted to know or did find out or and will use that information somehow to try to destroy, discredit, divide America and hurt Tupper Carlson.
The problem is 150 million people worldwide, that's my understanding of the numbers, tuned in to this particular broadcast.
Now there's power and strength in numbers and the problem that they're running into They like to go after structures.
They want the structures divided and controlled.
The structures that make up the United States of America.
But the problem is the world is becoming very quickly, with the internet, cellular.
I want you to understand the difference.
I can control a series of small churches if they all join together under one umbrella and choose to take their guidance from one particular place, because then all I have to do is control that one particular place.
So then I can control the whole structure as long as I can overrun that one particular thing.
Now, America is largely becoming cellular in terms of our cognitive resources.
There are people scattered all over America that are beginning to think independently outside the structure, turn off their televisions, read more books, and begin to understand what's going on.
This is the real threat.
Because they can't control it if it's not a single entity.
They can't control it if it's cellular people spread out all over the place, patriots who read their Bible, patriots who understand their American history.
That's what they're afraid of.
And I guarantee you, they will try to make a lesson out of Tucker Carlson.
They will try to show, if you step off the plantation, which we can no longer control, we will find a way to come after you.
Patriots, wake up!
Your stuff isn't important.
Your houses are not as important as you think you are.
Your stuff isn't as important.
Being right is.
Being right is what matters when it all comes down to it and it's said and done.
So you need to not fear.
Do not fear.
These evil men coming after you any longer, be willing to break loose of your stuff, your bank accounts, your money, and do something that's right for America.
There is lessons to be learned in this.
I love the fact that he painted in color.
I love the fact that he painted in color.
Now, Tucker Carlson, to me, is really no different than Bill O'Reilly.
Remember the way Bill O'Reilly treated Jim Fetzer?
He was at Fox News.
Obviously, he was controlled at that point in time.
Tucker Carlson has decided to start his own network.
But let's ask the question.
Let's really deal with it.
Where does he get his money?
And who pulls the strings?
I will take a carry leg over any of these people, any day, any time, anywhere.
And Tucker Carlson, no.
I don't trust him.
This network's grown too fast, too easy.
He was separated out.
To me, it feels like a psyop.
And no, I don't trust him.
And to tell you the truth, I trust the script that y'all got from before it's news.
More than I trust the interview that was released.
And before it's news never puts out anything that's real.
But I sure like that script a lot better than this one.
Because this was a boring history lesson.
If Putin was talking about the history of Russia, why didn't he go into the Bolshevik Revolution?
Yeah.
Yeah.
16 million people.
Slaughtered, starved, murdered, and destroyed by a Jewish cartel.
And you miss, you miss that piece of history?
That's what made Russia.
On that, Brian said something very keen.
At one point in the interview, when Putin was speaking to Carlson, he said, you know, Zelensky, this Nazis, Zelensky, Zelensky, the Jew, he said,
Jew, he's a Jew, or Zelensky, the Jew and Nazis, the moment he said Jew, the moment Putin said Jew, Tucker Carlson instantly went, well, you know, it's blah, blah, blah, blah, and he deviated in this other direction the moment Putin said Jew.
And, you know, he's Putin.
There's stories about Putin having a Jewish mother, you know, in his name and all sorts of other stuff.
But it's very telling.
Stalin had a Jewish wife?
Many people believe Stalin was Jewish.
That's Stalin!
What is really under the hood in Russian history?
Because I guarantee you, we didn't get it from that interview.
Fascinating.
More.
Wow.
Useful idiot.
How the West reacted at Tucker's interview with Putin.
Hillary called Tucker a useful idiot.
Vladimir Putin gave an interview to American journalist Tucker Carlson, influential conservative commentator, former employee of Fox.
Western media unleashed a barrage of criticism, tried to convict him of sympathy with Russian leadership, accused him of playing along with the Kremlin.
Russian leader and press secretary Dmitry Peskov said Tucker's conversation with Putin caused an overwhelming response.
The interview will be analyzed for a long time, the Kremlin official noted.
The full version will be released on February 9.
The announcement, saying ordinary Americans do not reliably understand the situation in Russia and Ukraine, received more than 60 million views in 13 hours.
At the same time, the European Union threatened the journalists with sanctions.
Here was a promo for the forthcoming interview.
I just watched this interview, all of it.
When I went to copy the YT, the YouTube address, the whole thing had disappeared.
We are mushrooms to the oligarchs and the neocons, and we know what is fed to those plants.
I am not sure that most of us, a country less than 300 years old, can grasp European culture.
Speaking in that context, Tucker is like a wise father.
Speaking to his adolescent ignorant child, it was a great interview, very impressive.
See the comments, one of which I copied below.
J. Robert If I put my preconceived notions and opinions aside, I cannot help but recognize that President Putin is exquisitely articulate, highly informed, unabashedly patriotic, and apparently obviously sincere.
Meanwhile, My country's president is a pathological Syria liar who does not know his ass from a lemon.
He cannot speak intelligibly.
He cannot even find his own way to the stairs.
And when he does, he falls up them.
He has no patriotism, no sincerity, no integrity, no morals, no conscience, no understanding of history, and apparently no bladder sphincter control in addition.
He is a filthy, perverted, hair-sniffing pedophile whose own f-son calls him Pedo Pete in his phone contacts.
I won't bother listing 100 problematic perverse characteristics, since they're clearly a result of my president's lack of parroting skills and would take hours to itemize.
This interview is absolutely fantastic.
We all owe a huge debt of gratitude to Mr. Tucker Carlson, not merely For the amazing long-form interviews he produces, but also for helping to expose the matrix-like stranglehold American journalism has endured under the thumb of governmental and corporate entities for far too long.
Much respect and gratitude.
Member of the EU Parliament threatened sanction against Tucker for interviewing Putin.
He has dared to do what other American journalists have done in the past—interview Russian President Putin.
Democrats are furious about it, but it's not just Americans.
Now an EU Parliament member wants sanctions on Tucker for doing what journalists are supposed to do.
Here are the most critical reviews I was able to find.
The Putin-Tucker interview exposed Tucker as a CIA dupe.
Generally, this two-hour interview establishes Putin's credentials as a rational and cultured man compared to the W.E.F.
Sockpuppets running the West.
He has been delegated the white hat in the coming world war, so Westerners will not fight.
The interview contained no reference to the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, the pandemic, Agenda 2030, toxic vaccines, or lockdowns.
No reference to the fact that Satanist Jews run the show in Washington and Kiev.
Russia looks good, but it's part of a charade designed to justify World War III.
Tucker didn't raise any of those pressing questions, and especially The most shocking thing about it?
No mention of Gaza-Israel-U.S.-Iran wars.
And finally, a Trump phenomenon with James Haysa on Norby Head.
On the day of the release of the Tucker Carlson interview with Vladimir Putin, February 8, 2024.
I am sad and distraught to say that what could have been, should have been, a history-changing communication with the leader of the Russian people would have been turned into a hot mess by Tucker, but wasn't, thanks to the brilliance and goodness of a greater man, President Putin.
Amazingly.
President Putin graciously, unbelievably, managed to defuse hand grenades lobbed at him by Tucker.
I can't tell you how disappointed I am by this man I have been idolizing.
Tucker was a turd for two solid hours.
So much for Tucker is the unquestionable best choice for VP.
I can only hope he will watch his own interview many times.
Yeah, I would agree with that.
what an ass he was as he tried to blow his historic opportunity to do something truly great for our people and for the world.
Scott, your thoughts?
Yeah, I would agree with that.
I mean, a lot of people have said the same comments.
When I first watched it, I thought Tucker seemed smarmy, cheeky, a little boyish, like a whiny little bitch.
I'll put it that way.
He had this arrogance and this establishment snarkiness to him that he's always had.
And it's, you know, in a sense, it's kind of a spoiled quality.
He came from a sound family.
That's a good thing.
He married one woman and had four daughters.
And it was his high school sweetheart.
So he's been very conservative establishment, in a sense, and very sheltered.
And he's worked in Washington.
He's worked in the cushions of journalism.
He's never been out in the field.
He's never bled.
He's never fought.
He's never seen men die.
He's never cried.
He's never been in the traumas of war.
He's never been thrown in jail.
He's had a little, you know, accusations of sexual indiscretion or whatever that he was thrown out later.
That's the closest thing to trauma Tucker's ever had.
And his interview with Putin, I think, in a sense, if I gave him a grade, I'd give him a B. Maybe even a B-.
Because I'm advanced placement.
I'm AP politics.
I don't go with the average retard.
And that's what Tucker demonstrated in some of these questions.
You know, nothing was really asked and nothing was, you know, really new except what Putin provided.
Putin provided the history of Russia.
They didn't go into Klaus Schwab.
They didn't go in the World Economic Forum.
They didn't go into the biochemical labs.
Putin talked, I think, a little bit about it, about the Slavic DNA.
I was happy to see Redacted actually took some of my interviews when I originally did this in the spring of 2020.
Two, I think it was, when Press TV had me on talking about the bio labs.
So there's a lot of missed things that could have and should have been talked about.
That I think intelligent Americans are upset about.
And we should be upset.
Again, we do not accept other people's half-baked attempts.
We use their half-baked attempts to construct a more idyllic model and idyllic questions.
How should this have been done?
That's what you do in military operations.
You evaluate how you performed.
Has Tucker evaluated?
He said, I should have done this.
I forgot to do this.
I shouldn't have done that.
I could have done this.
Has he done any of those evaluations of his performance?
I doubt it.
So, there's a lot of things that—it's a good thing, Jim.
I'll always stress, it was a good thing that Tucker sat down with Putin.
It's a good thing that he went to Russia.
It's a good thing that he went to Russia and did this.
Didn't meet into some European place, but went to Russia.
He was welcomed.
He's seen the city.
He was welcomed by people.
Hopefully, we'll see something from Tucker's adventures in Russia.
I mean, I could show you what I did in my videos and the people there, and I'll tell you, they were all salt-of-the-earth Christian people that, when I reflect upon it now, the Russian people, including Russian politicians, including Vladimir Putin, The Russian people, to me, symbolize Christ appearing to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, saying, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
And they've been saying that to Ukraine.
Zelensky, Ukraine, Poroshenko, why do you persecute us?
You know, we're all Slavics.
We're all Slavic brethren.
We're all part of the same landmass, Russia, Russia, that's been around since 800.
Why are you throwing your lot in for a bunch of boy-loving, environmental-worshiping schizophrenics in NATO and the EU and America?
Why are you accepting they're 30 pieces of silver to stab your Russian family in the back?
So that's what Russia and Putin represents to me, what I reflect, because I've seen their patience up close and personal.
Nobody else has, and I guarantee you I've seen things Tucker Carlson hasn't seen, and even Ritter hasn't seen, because no one has been in the war zones and looked into these eyes and looked into these people and these women, especially, whose homes have been blown up and turned into piles of rubble.
And looked at men being treated on hospital beds after shrapnels being pulled out from our weapons.
And until you do that, you really don't know what's going on in the Russian mind, and you don't know the greatness of the Russian soul, because they can forgive, and are forgiving, and are constantly showing restraint and forgiveness in this whole military situation, both towards Ukraine And America, and Britain, and Europe.
Putin does not have a violent, angry, vendetta, vengeance, revenge orientation.
We do, and that's why we hate and throw so much hostility against him, because we're projecting onto him the same vile, demonic hatred that animates the United States of America in so many pockets.
Jim?
We are generally cerebral men, and cerebral men always have a test to determine how they evaluate information that they receive.
It's called a litmus test.
We try to determine, basically, if there's gold in the solution.
The litmus test that we generally apply here on Dr. Fetzer's channel is, will they talk about a false flag?
Now, granted, There's not many people that are left that are willing to do that, but if you don't think 9-11 was fake, I'm not talking to you.
I might listen to what you have to say and take it under advisement or make an evaluation of it or critique of it or at least bury it in the back of my mind as a variable, but I'm not going to take you seriously until you are willing to deal with this very clear, very important litmus test.
Is it true?
Is it true?
And that doesn't necessarily have to do with, is this true from my perspective, or is this true from that perspective?
The question is more, is it true?
The Prophet Isaiah used to walk around with a thumb line, a plum line, and he'd hang it down.
He'd basically walk around saying, but is it true?
Is it true?
Is it true?
And because it set the standard for what truth is.
Now, Tucker Carlson came out of Fox News.
Tucker Carlson is part of the traditional journalist category that always has a twist and always has an agenda that supports the people that pay them money.
I am a lot more interested in putting my time and energy into men that I know will tell me something that's true, even if it's not the whole picture.
And so I think this was a very interesting distraction from what's really important and what's really going on in the world.
To me, it almost feels like it's another type of PSYOP, because what did they achieve?
Nothing!
What did they point?
What walls did they break down?
What did they achieve?
Nothing!
What evil did they expose?
Nothing!
Nothing!
I'm tired of talk.
It's time to begin to evaluate things as to whether they're true or whether they're not.
And this was neat.
150 million people got distracted for almost 10 days here in February.
Five days here in February.
So what?
A lot bigger problems that we've got to deal with.
And Putin was right pointing out that we have a border problem.
We have a $33 trillion debt problem.
But is anybody talking about those real things?
Those are real things that he brought up.
Who's talking about them?
Oh, we're talking about Tucker Carlson.
Like, Tucker Carlson's gonna change the world.
The man's not a prophet.
The man is not out there delivering anything new to us.
All he's doing is walking around, making a show, and building his network so he can be the next Fox News.
I don't trust him, and I don't think you should either.
Well, just to say a few words on the other side of the ledger, I think that given the Enthusiasm NATO is displaying for war with Russia, that having Vladimir Putin on for two hours to present the other side was manifestly valuable and may have been exquisitely timely because he Divested the idea that he was some kind of aggressive lunatic.
He was clearly calm, collected, totally rational, vastly intelligent.
I'd say he's got an IQ of 180, would be my best estimate.
He was explaining the circumstance that it caused Russia to have to intervene in Ukraine on behalf of the people of the Donbass, that this was not some reckless act of aggression by the Russian Federation, but a move to save the lives and the property of people who had come under assault after the coup of 2014.
That he'd actually made at least two peace overtures, one of which was ready to be signed by Kiev until Boris Johnson intervened and scuttled the whole thing, that he's still prepared for a peace arrangement, that Ukraine is an artificial nation that was constructed out of parts of Hungary, Romania, and Poland.
In reading between the lines, I would suggest that if Russia is forced to take all of Ukraine, they'll parcel it back and give those portions back to Romania, Hungary, and Poland.
Then there will be no more Ukraine, and frankly, I think that would be good for the world.
Yes.
In my judgment, notwithstanding the flaws, in retrospect, we can see lots of issues we might have liked for Tucker to have pursued, that he might have done it in a more diligent fashion, that in my opinion, he could have been better prepared.
At one point, I was supposed to do an interview with Vladimir Putin, and I tell you, the questions I had arranged, which had nominally, I was told, been approved, were far more penetrating than anything you had from Tucker Carlson.
Nevertheless, I say, this was a major event.
And may have made a contribution.
We're unable to assess, to defeat the aspiration for war with Russia.
War we cannot win.
That Russia doesn't want to fight, but where if push comes to shove, if they're forced to fight, we will lose.
Don, take us out.
We will lose.
That's not a good thing to end up having.
Half of our show on.
It looks like that's probably the status.
And it's really tense times these days.
And it's on the Super Bowl Sunday.
And I mean, things are really critical.
And really, things could happen today, this week.
You want to stay tuned and find out what our opinion is.
So come on back for the second hour.
This is wonderful.
And so we'll see you then.
Okay.
▲
Export Selection