All Episodes
Previous Next
April 20, 2024 - Jim Fetzer
01:57:32
The Raw Deal (19 April 2024) with John Carman
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You're a host on the Raw Deal right here on Revolution Radio.
For whatever reason, I'm not hearing the breaks.
I'm making the assumption this is going out over the air.
I cannot be 100% sure, but I shall proceed on the assumption that that is taking place.
We seem to have avoided...
Nineteenth day of April.
Twenty twenty four.
We seem to have.
We seem to have averted World War Three.
My co-host, by the way, is attempting to join.
and let me see what I can do here to make it happen.
John, much regret. much regret.
Israel has mounted airstrikes on Iran, the U.S.
as Tehran plays down the attack momentarily.
I'm not being allowed to join you, Try the other number 608-466-4339.
608-466-4339.
Thanks.
So here we go.
Hopefully join will be.
608-466-4339. 608-466-4339.
Thanks.
So here we go.
Hopefully John will be joining momentarily.
The Guardian reports.
Israel has mounted airstrikes on Iran.
U.S.
confirms that Tehran plays down the attack.
Iranian officials indicate they had no immediate plan for retaliation after explosions were reported in the sky over Ifahan and Tarbirut.
U.S.
officials confirmed they carried out these airstrikes, according to Italy's Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani.
Speaking later on Friday, the U.S.
told the G7 meeting in Cabrera it had received last-minute information from the Israelis about a drone action in Iran.
A drone action!
Here we have more about it.
There are multiple stories.
Iran has an emergency war meeting and there's a nationwide alert.
Iran wasted no time firing off its air defense batteries when the Iranian Supreme National Security Council convened its meeting over the incoming attack from Israel.
They basically warned all bases across Iran to be on guard, which of course should be obvious.
Here we have a number of stories about it.
Breaking!
Israel bombed seven cities in Iran.
Another.
Iran calls emergency war council meeting.
An emergency meeting of the Iranian Supreme Security Council has been convened.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard declares a state of maximum alert at all its bases and camps across Iran.
More from the Associated Press.
Iran fired air defense batteries Friday and some flights were diverted or grounded after reports of explosions near a major air base.
Glad, John, you could join me.
side where drones were spotted.
It was unclear if the country was under attack.
Duh.
But tensions are high after Iran's unprecedented missile and drone attack on Israel.
The Israeli military did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Israel.
Glad, John, you could join me.
Excellent.
Israel is about to respond to Iran's unprecedented weekend attack, leaving the region bracing for further escalation after months of fighting in Gaza.
Allies have urged Iran, Israel, to hold back on any response to the attack, which could spiral out of control.
Thursday, the United States vetoed a widely-backed UN resolution that would have paved the way for full United Nations membership for a state of Palestine.
The vote in the 15-member Security Council was 12 in favor, the U.S. opposed, and two abstentions.
Separately, the U.S. and Britain announced they were imposing a new round of sanctions on Iran.
The move comes as European Union leaders meeting in Brussels about ramp up sanctions on Iran to target its drone and missile deliveries to proxies in Gaza, Yemen, and Lebanon.
Well, why the hell aren't they imposing sanctions on Israel for the slaughter of Palestinians?
I mean, the hypocrisy!
It is disgusting beyond words.
Meanwhile, Iran is seeking to downplay.
Here we have yet another report.
Iran attempts to dismiss Israeli attack as not a big deal, not an external attack, when it obviously was an external attack and was a big deal.
The Islamic Republic of Iran attempted to save face Friday by dismissing reports of an Israeli airstrike in the country.
Israel's strike, which was limited in scale.
Came in response to an unprecedented missile and drone barrage, more than 300 in total, launched by Iran last week.
Israel, the US, UK, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, UAE defended against Iran's attack last weekend, downing 99% of the projectiles fired at Israel.
There you got it.
There's the lineup.
US, UK, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates.
Meanwhile, Tehran has signaled no retaliation for Israeli drone attack on Iran.
Explosions echoed over Iranian city Friday and what sources describe it as Israeli attack, but Tehran played down the incident, indicating it had no plans for retaliation.
A response that appeared A limited scale of the attack and Iran's muted response appeared to signal a successful effort by diplomats who've been working to avoid all-out war since the Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel last Saturday.
Iranian media and officials described a small number of explosions which they said resulted from air defenses hitting three drones over the city of Isfahan in central Iran.
Notably, they referred to the incident as an attack by infiltrators rather than by Israel obviating the need for retaliation.
John, I can only say I'm breathing a sigh of relief when I first heard the reports that Israel had hit Iran.
I think you went blank.
Yeah, go ahead.
I hear you.
You went blank, Brad, after you said, when Israel did what?
When Israel attacked Iran here, I thought we were on the verge of World War III, but now Iran is downplaying the attack, suggesting it's not a big deal, even describing what happened as infiltrators rather than Israel.
Your thoughts?
Well, it sounds like they expect it.
You know, I've been monitoring this stuff just like you for years.
You know, and what's interesting is this new term called proxy wars.
So if Iran does something, we go after Afghanistan, you know, it doesn't make sense.
But if they need that kind of attention, then give it to them.
You know what I mean?
There's preemptive strikes.
Remember years ago, Israel sent two jets, at least two jets over there, and they did some strikes on some underground military development bases where they were doing the nukes program years ago.
I'm not sure if it was during the Obama administration, but that's an example of what they did.
They know exactly what they're doing.
So if they have a nuclear program, weapons-grade radium and all that stuff, then yeah, if they're going to use it for terrorist acts, then that's what they did.
Problem is, the other countries kind of cut off the access routes from Israel To fly over certain countries or maybe it was from another NATO country and they had to get permission to go through one of their countries like France, for instance, because you can't go flying your nukes or certain type of defensive weapons over certain countries when they're not at war.
You know, that's just like common sense, but I respect.
Not on another subject, but happy April 19th.
Is April 19th a special day, John?
Is that a special date in history?
Yeah, I want you to think back to Lexington and Concord.
And April 19th was also a day in 1995, and a guy named Timothy McVeigh at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City.
Very, very good.
Yeah, it just bothered me for several days.
I said, no, something's coming up.
I gotta, I gotta Lock in on it.
And I finally got it like last night and I go, shoot.
So watch for events, folks, kids out there, you know, maybe something might happen.
I don't know.
So truth out, it's published a very appropriate piece with that, of course, is a left wing website under a UN charter.
Iran's attack was a legal response to Israel's illegal attack.
I like this.
Iran's attack on Israel was lawful self-defense, carried out in compliance with international humanitarian law.
A lot of venues seem to be missing this rather crucial point.
I'm talking about mainstream.
On April 1st, Israel mounted an unprovoked military attack on a building that was part of the Iranian embassy complex in Damascus, Syria.
Skilling seven of Iran's senior military advisors and five additional persons.
The victims included General Mohammed Reza Zahed, head of Iran's covert military operations in Lebanon and Syria, and two other senior generals.
Although Israel's attack violated the United Nations Charter, the UN Security Council refused to condemn it because the United States, the UK, and France exercised their vetoes on April 4th.
Iran considered this attack on its consulate an act of war.
Trita Parsi wrote on foreign policy, which of course it was.
I mean, the consulate territory is Iranian sovereign territory, as are consulates and embassies around the world, the sovereign territory of the nations they represent.
On April 11th, a permanent mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations stated Had the U.N.
Security Council condemned the Zionist regime's reprehensible act of aggression on our diplomatic premises in Damascus and subsequently brought to justice its perpetrators, the imperative for Iran to punish this rogue regime might have been obviated.
Then on April 13, In response to Israel's attack, Iran fired more than 300 drones and missiles at the Israeli airbase from which the April 1st attacks had emanated.
Only two of them landed inside Israel.
No one was killed.
A Bedouin girl was injured.
This part is wrong.
In fact, there were seven ballistic missiles, all of which hit.
They took out Two airbases and an intelligence base killing 44 Mossad IDFs.
So, truth out, it doesn't have all the facts.
But the point they're making, namely this was a lawful response to an illegal attack, is impeccable.
The US, UK, France, Jordan, and Israel, here they omit the UAE, whose role, so far as I know, is indeterminate, intercepted the remaining Iranian missiles and drones, a senior U.S. military official said.
There's no significant damage within Israel itself, which again is false, but I like that Truthout is reporting how under the U.N. charter, Iran's attack was a legal response to Israel's illegal attack.
John, your thoughts?
Yeah, it's going back and forth, but what I want people to understand, is the misinformation that's going out there or They're trying to get the empathy of the world events, the countries or the world nations.
And we're at that point where this thing about the special World Economic Forum, the 10 Nations Control, it's prophetic in the Bible, et cetera, et cetera.
But every time they come up with an attack, I have to screen it out going, wait a minute, are those crisis sectors?
Did it really happen?
And when they have these people listed as being victims, sometimes you have to question their facts and what information like you're just stating now from this other source, when in fact other other things had happened.
We don't we don't get the truth here in the United States anymore, folks.
That's the problem.
You know, I have to contact people outside the United States, which I did before till I got cut off telegram and other other sources.
And they'll tell you.
Oh no, everything's fine over here in Paris, France or something, and everybody's putting out stuff about riots and shootings and stuff, just as an example.
And when they're doing these preemptive strikes and stuff back and forth, it's a tete-a-tete, back and forth, back and forth.
Iran does something?
Well, they have a right to respond, and they color the words, and it doesn't sound very vicious, but if you've watched any of these National Security Council meetings, and they had these representatives up there, The gentleman from Iran, they had a lady in the background with her full burqa, hijab and all that, and I'm reading the behavioral analysis responses from these people.
They're very articulate and they're running through the same stuff that they did back in World War II, when we had the Japanese ambassadors, or maybe North Vietnamese people during the Vietnam War.
You know, so it's a typical response thing, but it's just more rhetoric.
Hopefully they'll stall off.
But you know, the vote, remember the vote about making Palestine a national sovereign country?
We voted against it.
So we had to support Israel, right?
Makes you wonder, right?
That's what they've always been headed for, is to establish their own country.
It doesn't make me wonder.
I mean, Israel, as opposed to there being a Independent Palestinian state from the beginning, who has boasted how he's defeated every effort to do so.
The United States in foreign policy is acting as a stooge of Israel.
I've said before, John, and say again, if you envision George Soros is our president for domestic matters, including opening the floodgates of the border to millions of illegals, not enforcing the law, allowing crime to run rampant, trashing our elementary schools with all kinds of bizarre sex, transgender education, depriving children of their innocence.
On the one hand and baby net yahoo as our president report policy including ukraine war which is being fought because the plan was to make ukraine the new israel not to mention the slaughter of palestinians.
Endlessly supported by the united states where we simply cut off the weapons it would end over night you can say that.
United States is just a mere shadow, trivial, warped, insignificant version of what it has been in the past.
John, I find this disgusting.
Meanwhile, Larry Wilkinson is describing Iran's retaliation against Israel as a strong slap to Bibi Netanyahu.
Let's listen.
In Ukraine, it's just a matter of moments, days, weeks, whatever, that people recognize it and all agree that we need to talk.
I mean, we've got Ukrainian troops surrendering now.
Most of these soldiers speak Russian, if not as their first language, then a second language, and so it's working.
Why should you die, says the bullhorn.
You know, why should you die?
You're going to die if you keep fighting.
Come, we will feed you.
We will water you.
We will treat you well.
Don't believe what you've heard.
And they're surrendering.
Larry, do you think that Russians would cross the Napa River?
In your opinion, is that possible?
That's the big...
Strategic question right now.
I've talked with a couple of others about it and we all agree that it's highly possible.
But we don't.
We're not in agreement that it's probable.
Because if he crosses the river, then he's probably going for Odessa.
And I mean, you could cross the river and just sort of stop and then that way you would have the river as a negotiating point.
But I don't know.
I don't know.
The other thing would be, how do you see it right now in Ukraine?
Do you think that we're going to see a military coup against Zelensky and his administration?
Because the situation is so fragile right now in Ukraine.
And made that way not just by the crowd around Zelensky or the leadership group in general, but also by NATO.
And all the different views that are being voiced on him, probably by everyone from Macron to Stoltenberg, and can't forget the Germans too.
It's, I wouldn't want to be him right now, but he's, he has shown a remarkable, one of the individuals I was having a conversation with, he showed a remarkable ability to survive.
Were he to suddenly Change and be the advocate of peace and the advocate of a decent negotiated settlement.
Ceasefire immediately and then a decent negotiated settlement where Ukraine keeps, you know, the fundamental parts of its country.
He could be a hero.
He could turn it all around.
He's shown the kind of skill.
I won't call it political skill.
I'll call it human relations skill.
That is part of political skill, but he's shown it in the past.
Maybe he'll show it again.
But here comes the question.
Is the Biden administration willing to go along with negotiations or even peace talks?
There's the question, because you've got to eat at least behind the scenes, if not publicly.
You've got to eat a lot of crow, because you've made so many statements.
And you've said so much is important and dependent on that appropriation getting through the house and all these other statements you've made.
You just negate them in one fell swoop.
And people start saying, well, why did he say that?
Why did he say this?
What's happening now?
Did you tell me what we're negotiating?
That's an abrupt change and a brave, courageous man with No real dependence on a second term in the sense that I'll die if I don't get it, would take it and run with it.
But not Biden, I don't think.
I think a second term for Biden has become sort of like a passage of right.
You know, it's got to happen.
I don't think he cares if he lives through it.
He just wants it.
He wants that second term.
He wants the glory of having won a second term.
And that's tough to fight because that becomes nonsensical.
It becomes illogical.
It's all about emotion and it's all about political emotion, which is the most dangerous kind.
But maybe he'd surprise us too.
Maybe he would become the peacemaker.
I mean, if they both could latch onto that and invite Putin into a similar I think Putin would be willing to do it.
I mean, he's not going to stand up there and say, you know, I want peace so badly, I'm making peace, blah, blah.
But he would be a reasonable negotiator, I think, because he wants us to stop, too.
So if reasonable minds, that's what diplomacy is all about, supposed to be.
If reasonable minds prevail, You could have some bluster and, you know, exchange a few blows in the beginning, and make some preposterous remarks, and then sit down and start talking.
Right now, we've heard that, as you mentioned, Ukrainian soldiers are surrendering, and even the Zov battalion, that they were a far-right part of the army.
Don't want to fight anymore.
It's over.
That's why I think the situation is so serious right now.
Yep.
Very serious.
And if we don't recognize it, and we, primarily Washington, but the others too, I was listening to Cameron talking about Gaza today.
What an idiot he's become.
But basically us, Shultz, Macron, Stoltenberg, other Brussels luminaries, have got to accept this.
And they've got to start serious negotiations and don't carry their Their pride on their forehead, as it were, as they go into the negotiations.
Don't be trying to get one up every time you turn around.
Try to get a good settlement.
A good settlement for Ukraine.
A decent settlement for Russia.
After all, it's been bloodied heavily also.
And a good settlement for Europe.
A good settlement for Europe is the simplest one because you want it to stop.
And you want the war to be over.
And you want whatever is to result with those disputed areas to be monitored by the UN and kept peaceful while it's happening.
Those are the major things you want to happen.
You remember last time we talked, Lukashenko coming out of meeting with Putin, he said that after May 21st, Putin will not sign any agreement with Zelensky.
That could have two meanings.
First, He's willing to do this as soon as possible.
Let's leap forward and see what he has to say about DOOM.
You've overwhelmed all manner of other air defense assets, and you have penetrated majorly, and you're going to do a lot of damage and kill a lot of people.
And that was sort of the signal, I think, that the smarter people in the Israeli Defense Force took from this.
I heard General McKenzie come on, former Central Command commander.
In my mind, a perfect example of what's wrong with the U.S.
military leadership today.
He's basically an idiot.
But he comes on and he started.
I'm sure he was delivering a prescribed message.
Oh, this didn't do anything.
Israel proved how effective its air defenses are.
Everything.
It was just a major, major effort by Iran.
Major effort.
And it was completely and totally thwarted.
Right, General.
If you believe that, I don't want you commanding my baby carriage.
And that's the way I've heard other American generals talking about it, who want to weigh in from time to time.
That's not really what the Iranians did.
The Iranians showed what they could do.
They showed what they could do if they picked up the pace, as it were, and they began to use some different things.
And they also probably showed what they could do if you shot back at them.
I'm, as a military professional, I really want to, I don't want to test it, but I want to see what the S-400s will do because they come so highly praised, better than anything we've got, the Russians say anyway.
And it seems like the Turks think the same thing about them.
So go ahead and shoot back at the Iranians in a similar kind of dense array and let's see what they do to you.
Let's see what they do to any airplanes you might send that way.
Although, the Israelis simply don't have the tanking capacity to go that far with manned aircraft, except to go on a one-way mission.
And they could do that.
They could do that, crash land in eastern Iran or Azerbaijan or someplace like that.
But they don't have the legs to do it with manned aircraft.
I think it's a little bit more even game now.
Now, anytime the United States jumps in full force, it's not.
Just from all your deed, you could saturate Iran.
We'd lose a lot of airplanes, and it would be a shock to the U.S.
Air Force, but we'd lose a lot of airplanes.
But you could saturate in two or three carriers if we could get them out there.
We're having problems sailing our ships these days.
We don't have enough sailors.
They're breaking.
I don't know if you saw about Boxer and Wasp.
We can't put an ARG out there.
We can't put a marine amphibious force out there.
I'm not going to say too much about what we could do, but I do think initial waves anyway would be devastating, and the Iranians know that.
We're still back to the same old game, and I'm happy to see that Biden was intimating, at least, that we weren't going to be in on this.
That's what Netanyahu wants.
He wants the United States to go in, and to rescue his little butt, because he's in trouble.
He's losing in Gaza.
I mean, if you really look at the situation in Gaza, he has lost, as anybody with a strategic brain knew he would.
You know, what do I mean by lost?
Well, he said he was going to annihilate Hamas.
At best, he's probably attrited to them by 10-11%.
Then that's going to be announced, of course, as what he wanted to do in the first place.
Whether he goes on from here and does more in Gaza is going to be interesting because he's halted now for enough period of time where I think he's probably got some serious Logistic, manpower, and other real-world problems in addition to the strictures being placed on him, as they are by Biden, to worry about.
So I don't think he can go much further in Gaza.
But now the question in my mind becomes, well, okay, if this is it, maybe we're going to see a little bit more and then that's it, when is Ben-Gavir going to start striking the settlement tents?
And building his settlements in the northern part of Gaza or wherever he's going to start.
And when are we going to see the real essence of what this was all about?
And what's that going to mean for Netanyahu?
Is he then going to say to Ben Gavir, I'm sorry, you know, you're not going to do that because the big guy over there, our sugar daddy is telling us we can't do that.
I don't know.
I don't know, but I do know that that's the purpose, and I think what Netanyahu hopes happens is this just sort of fades away, and maybe this confrontation with Iran, and maybe a little confrontation more acute with Hezbollah, maybe that's going to mix in here to kind of make Gaza sort of recede a bit, and then we'll just be back to where we were, which I said before is what I think we're headed for.
We're headed for another government, a Likud government, running Israel into the ground and treating the Palestinians and non-Israeli, non-Jewish Israelis very, very badly, third, fourth class citizenry, and just building up the angst and the anger again and having another go at it 10 or 11 years down the road.
Colonel Wilkerson, very smart.
I thought what he was saying about Ukraine is astute.
Of course, he wasn't actually responding to this latest, which appears to be purely a drone attack by Israel on Iran.
And since the Iranians are minimizing its significance, I think we have averted World War Three, where initially, John, I was convinced we're done for, that it was all over, that the world was going up in a mushroom cloud.
Your thoughts?
Mike, I tried to attach a photo, which I took off the screen several days ago last week, that shows you all the U.S.
ships in the Middle East area, which is the support we've already built up as a backup, no matter what happens.
So, I don't know if you can click onto it on the chat, where I double-clicked onto it, John, that's okay.
I mean, remember, this is an audio broadcast, so our audience can't see it.
Go right ahead, just tell us more.
Well, basically, Wilkerson was very accurate about this stuff, and then I was thinking way back in the 70s, because Nixon was supporting the Shah of Iran.
And then, of course, they had the Savak out there taking pictures of the Iranian students that were protesting in Washington, D.C.
And I came on just about the same time in 74.
And then that's when they deposed the Shah.
And by that time he had left the country and I think he had pancreatic cancer or something.
But during that time, Nixon, apparently, the story is, provided them with a special Money-making printing currency machine and somehow $100 bill plates showed up so they could use it.
That stuff is very restricted.
That's part of our system in the United States.
So they're backing money in a different way is what I was kind of getting at.
But every time they're doing this stuff back and forth, Wilkerson, I'm right in line with what he's saying.
I do not disagree.
You know, they're building up the same thing.
I got contacts in Israel, Americans, and they're telling me the same stuff.
But when I ask them, how are your neighbors?
How are the Palestinians?
What's going on?
They get along fine with them in the area in Jerusalem, but then all this other stuff is piled up.
And if you look at all the people in the Gaza, the Gaza Strip areas, they're forced into poverty, you know, and I'm experiencing that personally myself, but it's just the way they do it.
And it's unbelievable.
Egypt, Won't let him come over there.
So they're blocked off there.
They're pinched in.
I was personally protecting Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin, and Jimmy Carter at the White House when they were having peace talks.
So that would be 77.
Nothing developed out of that, but over five years or so later, 1981, Anwar Sadat was assassinated, you know, because of his peace talks.
Kind of a deal.
They'll never get around to peace.
Iran will still be the ones, the big monster in the East, and they'll keep pushing us, and we're the big Satan, you know, and it's starting to look like that too.
So, I'm just worried about the Nostradamus predictions about Gogme, Gog, Megiddo, and then the guy with the blue turban.
You know, if a guy shows up with a blue turban, he might want to look at that a little bit more.
Anyway, did I go off subject a little or no?
No, it's fine.
Meanwhile, just to reinforce my point about Netanyahu being our co-president, as it were, Biden announces new sanctions targeting Iran's drone industry after attack on Israel.
I mean, Why in the world should we be doing this, except that Israel has now suffered from attack using drones, and therefore Israel would like to cut off their ability to produce them?
Hear from the Epoch Times.
President Joe Biden's admin announced a new round of sanctions on April 18th intended to punish key figures in Iran's drone program after those weapons systems were used to strike Israel on April 13th.
Less than a week ago, notices are responding immediately.
Iran launched one of the largest missile and drone attacks the world has ever seen against Israel.
You should have said a drone attack against Israel, one of the largest the world has ever seen.
President Biden said, together with our allies and partners, the United States defended Israel.
We helped defeat this attack.
And today we're holding Iran accountable, imposing new sanctions and extra controls on Iran.
The Iranian government launched its missile and drone barrage against Israel in response to an April 1st airstrike.
Well, I'm listening to what you say.
as I've already explained, and even as Truthout acknowledged, what the Iranians did was in accordance with international law.
What the Israelis have done is not.
So we're getting, John, your comments about that?
Well, I'm listening to what you say.
At the same time, I'm evaluating all this stuff in history, because typically you can't just go around attacking another country.
And I've been monitoring this stuff for many years, where you hear a news item on NPR, right?
NPR is somewhat of a leftist type of a news program.
And they'll ask these guys on the Palestinian side about why, not necessarily why they attacked Israel, but the fact that they were attacking Israel, but they wouldn't ask them why.
They would say, wait a minute, out of the clear blue, you guys are just attacking Israel.
Why are you doing that?
You're sending off these missiles and so forth.
That's why we ended up giving them the Iron Dome in Israel.
But there was no answer.
So, well, folks, terrorists do that because that's just what they do.
They're terrorists.
You know, rape, pillage, kill, rape, pillage, kill.
And they're repeating it over and over again.
They don't care.
They set up sites at the hospitals.
They set up sites inside, in the tunnels, at schools.
They use women and children and defenseless innocent people to attack because they're not going to get retribution because they figure they're using the innocent people to block them as being a target.
At some point in time, they're going to have to accept certain casualties no matter what, and they still won't get back any information on the hostages, you know, since that time.
So it's a constant mantra for money and resources.
And while we're involved, we're indirectly through NATO, testing out technology for weapons and stuff.
Now they blocked off what?
99% of the attacks recently, which were missiles and drones and so forth.
That's, that's pretty impressive.
But look at all the money that stuff costs.
It's a lot of money.
Each missile that's sent off, it costs maybe upwards of millions.
Drones cost serious money.
So eventually over a period of time, just like in Ukraine, they're going to run out and they're going to need resources.
That's why China's behind the other side.
Iran's right there.
It's a proxy war again.
See, it's constant proxy war.
And then Americans are still going to work, slave, tax slave people that we are to support these wars.
And we're not getting anywhere.
Yeah, it's just, it's just running around in circles.
Yeah.
Same old ideas.
Yes.
Iran is now saying the Israeli strike may spark a shift in its nuclear policy.
Remember, Iran is for gone.
Though I did have a report I was explaining yesterday alleging that Vladimir Putin had called Netanyahu to say that Iran actually possessed nuclear warheads.
Let's see what we have here.
A top Iranian general said his country may reconsider its nuclear policies if Israel threatens to attack its atomic sites.
An implicit warning, Tehran might race toward a nuclear weapon as rhetoric continued to escalate in the wake of the April 13 drone and missile attack.
Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps commander, Ahmad, hadn't specified what the change might be, but Tehran has long said its nuclear program, which has prompted concern from the US, Israel, and the US-UN for years, is solely for peaceful purposes.
I believe that 100%.
Hegto also said such an attack would prompt a tit-for-tat on Israel's nuclear facilities.
Now, that could be very, very significant because Israel's a small country.
We know where their nuclear facilities are located, primarily in Timona.
If Iran were to hit Damona with one of these hypersonic cruise missiles that could cause contamination of Israel, that would make much of the country uninhabitable for hundreds of years, John.
I think Israel is playing with fire.
Yeah.
If you look at that map I sent you even on the chat, off to the right of Iran, which wasn't properly marked, because that's what they're doing on these Fox News and other news services, And I had to go to another updated picture that properly listed the aircraft in the countries.
And if you pull up another photo, like it shows the countries, off to the right is India.
India is a nuclear country.
So, you got India, then you got Iran moving left, and then you got Iraq and all these other countries.
If they put something like that up there for defense weapons, I guess that I get that.
The nuclear test ban treaties, going back to Kennedy and all that.
Certain treaties aren't signed.
They aren't co-signers like Russia for purposes that are purely political.
You have the right to defend yourself.
Period.
That's it.
Just like Second Amendment.
But yet when they say, well, you can't do this.
Well, yeah, but if you got all these other big bullies on the block with nukes, what are you going to do?
And then, of course, you got Rocket Man over there in North Korea playing games with his rockets.
It kind of concerns me because all this stuff is just building up.
And who gave all that money when Obama was president?
You know, the guy from Mombasa?
That's all that money that went to Iran to develop nuclear safe power source energy.
Well, it's weapons grade stuff that they're using for underground missiles and stuff.
I see BMS but again back to back to the belief system in the Islamic belief system they had they believe they have a right to lie to you so why would you want to deal with somebody who's going to lie to you right to your face you can't you can't trust it you can't sign the treaty doesn't mean anything you see what I mean so it just recycles back and forth people don't understand that philosophy go ahead yeah
Here's Glenn Greenwald interviewing Norman Finkelstein, who's suggesting Israel is prepared to drag the rest of the world down with them.
Check it out.
I'm fine, thank you.
So let's begin with the, I want to obviously spend a lot of our time on the Israeli war in Gaza, but before we get to that, there's obviously a recent issue which involves the Iranian retaliation against the Israelis for the April 1st bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus.
How do you see the Iranian response to that, and what do you think is the likelihood that we're on the verge of a major escalation in the war in the Middle East?
Well, nobody likes to sound like a Cassandra, the prophetess of doom in Greek mythology.
However, one also has a responsibility That if there is a significant danger lurking, in this case, one, one hesitates to say it, but a terminal danger lurking, then there is a responsibility to sound the alarm.
And I do believe that we are facing one of those moments where Israel is hurling towards the precipice and is determined, one way or another, to drag the rest of humanity with it.
The only point of departure, in my opinion, that's rational is to start with the theorem, not the thesis.
The theorem that Israel is a lunatic state.
And I don't say that in a glib way.
I don't say it in a emotive way.
I think one can say it in, for want of a better word, in a scientific way.
The state is certifiably crazy.
There are two poles for the entire Israeli spectrum.
It's a very small spectrum at this point.
At one poll, you can call it the poll of crackpot realists.
That was a term coined by the sociologist C. Wright Mills in his book, The Causes of World War III.
And by crackpot realist, he meant those folks who saw war as the only answer to every question, even as they acknowledged or were aware that the war wouldn't solve any problems.
It's just their first and their last reflex.
They were crackpots, but they were also of completely sound mind.
So a typical, in my opinion, a typical exemplar or an exemplar of a crackpot realist would be someone like Professor Benny Morris, Israel's chief historian.
He's urbane, He's engaging, he's sophisticated, he's secular, and he's also a crackpot.
Again, I don't say that glibly.
He advocates an attack he has been for the past 15 years.
He's been advocating an attack on Iran
He said that if the West, meaning the United States, doesn't join in, Israel will have to nuke Iran, and he says that the population will have deserved the fate of being incinerated, the tens of millions of them, because they elected the government.
Now, Morris must know that such an attack will trigger a reaction, if not from Iran, then from Hezbollah, which will be terminal for Israel.
And yet, without in the least bit being phased by that prospect, he advocates A nuclear attack on Iran.
At the other end of this very narrow spectrum are those who advocate what's called the Samson Option.
And you can find an interesting analysis of the Samson Option in Professor Noam Chomsky's book, Faithful Triangle.
And the Samson option is very simple.
I should also point out the notion that Professor Chomsky pointed to was then elaborated on about, I guess, five or ten years later—I can't remember now—by Seymour Hersh, the investigative reporter, in a book called The Samson Option.
And the Samson option basically is very simple.
Either pretend to be mad, to pretend to be crazy, so as to terrify your enemies and your allies, that if they don't do Israel's bidding, Israel is going to bring down the temple on everybody's head.
And there are those who are not simply pretending to be crazy by advocating the Samson option.
They are crazy.
They're lunatics.
And I do believe there is a significant portion of Israel's political spectrum That is either pretending to be crazy or actually is crazy.
And as you know, there's a very tiny step from pretending to be crazy to then coming to actually believe the phantoms you've conjured and becoming crazy.
And you saw an illustration of that.
That's just an illustration.
You saw it yesterday in the Security Council.
If you listened to Gilad Erdogan's speech, it was certifiably lunatic.
It was lunatic.
He starts by saying that Ayatollah is Hitler, the Islamic State is The Third Reich is hell-bent on conquering the whole world.
Iran is hell-bent on conquering the whole world.
He then says Iran is within weeks of acquiring a nuclear weapon.
And the world has to stop it.
And the upshot or bottom line is, if the world, to use his terminology, acts like Chamberlain, then Israel will have to act like Churchill.
Now, if you listened to his rhetorical delivery, It was as if he were saying, Who dares to doubt me?
In this chamber, meaning the Security Council.
If you listen, he even at one point held up an image on his iPad of Israel intercepting a drone over Al-Aqsa Mosque, allegedly intercepting a drone above Al-Aqsa Mosque.
And then he said that Israel is the true protector of Islamic holy sites and the Islamic Republic of Iran is the defiler of these holy sites.
This is, it's not even the subject of Monty Python.
It's not the subject matter of Monty Python.
This is lunacy run amok.
And if even half of Israeli society And only half of the Israeli political elite thinks this.
And in my opinion, it's much more than half.
The place is crazy.
You know, it's not too long ago that Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Prime Minister, he said that the whole idea of the final solution came not from Hitler, but from the Palestinian Mufti of Jerusalem.
I recently debated Benny Morris, and he was emphatic that the Mufti of Jerusalem played an important role in the final solution.
This is just, it's sheer craziness.
It's apologia para Hitler and for Nazis to say, oh, they didn't really want to kill the Jews until the Palestinians persuaded them to do so.
Well, of course, it's an apologia.
But for me, the real question is, or the real problem is, I think they really believe it.
I do.
I think we're at that point where, as I said, this notion of the Samson option, it has two aspects.
Pretend that you're crazy in order to get others to do your bidding for fear that you're going to do something lunatic.
And then those who are beyond pretending and are prepared in the name of their holy cause, where their backs might be up against the wall, or they think their backs are up against the wall, that they're going to bring down the whole temple, meaning all the goyim,
Are going to go with us.
It's a very scary prospect now, and I don't believe that Iran has many options.
Now, some people will say, and it's perfectly rational, some people will say, Iran, for the sake of humanity, Should not take the bait.
But I do not believe that Iran has that option.
And I will explain to you why, looking at the historical examples.
Once Israel is determined to go to war It will keep escalating the provocations, escalating the provocations, until it becomes untenable for a government to react with passivity.
In 1954, the Israeli leadership, in particular David Ben-Gurion, the then Prime Minister, and Moisha Dayan had decided that they were going to topple the Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser.
And as many historians have reported, they escalated the provocations, escalated the provocations until finally When Nasser kept resisting what he knew was Israel's intention to launch a war, Israel joined in with France and the UK to invade Egypt.
Egypt.
In 1982, or I should say in 1981, there was a ceasefire between Israel and the PLO.
It was signed in July 1981.
But Israel was determined to knock out the PLO, which was based then in southern Lebanon.
And even though the PLO kept resisting the provocations, Israel kept bombing south Lebanon, bombing south Lebanon, even though there was a ceasefire.
Escalating, escalating until it became untenable for the PLO not to react.
It should be borne in mind that the reason Israel attacked the PLO was because it was too moderate.
Namely, it supported a two-state settlement and Israel was afraid that pressures would be brought to bear on it.
To resolve the conflict for once and for all, but that would force the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, which wasn't prepared to do.
So let me just interject, Norman, if I could just interject.
Let me just say the breaks aren't taking place.
what we need to announce this is Revolution Radio Studio B 19 April 2024.
John give me your thoughts this This is the longest I've ever heard Norman Finkelstein speak, and I'm just saying I am impressed.
Every word he was saying, John, give me a moment.
He's touching on a lot of stuff that I'm aware of, too.
I sent you a picture of Temple Mount.
I don't know if you could see it or not.
That the Al-Aqsa building, the temple, is just south of that or just to the bottom of the picture of the Temple Mount, the Golden Dome, is very significant.
And what he said earlier about how Israel was actually protecting Islamic sites like that, it all leads up to a potentiality of the Golden Dome being destroyed.
And once that happens, that means the Israel Hebrews are going to move in for the third temple that has to be built.
But if they're protecting the Al-Aqsa, which was actually partially destroyed or destroyed months ago.
John, hold on.
I'm told there actually is a break taking.
Here it is beyond me.
So we'll just stand by for a moment or two, and then I'll bring you back in with the excellent comments.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
I would assume they weren't being played.
I've now been notified.
They have been being played.
You haven't been able to hear what we've been saying because the breaks were.
overriding unsurprisingly.
John, just back up and repeat what you were saying for the last few minutes, please.
I was complimenting Norman Feiglstein for this most lengthy presentation I've ever heard him given.
I am impressed.
Yeah, all the information he's talked about, and I'm not claiming to be a total expert in the Middle East, but I do study that stuff, and I did protect the Israeli embassy, and I've come into contact with all kinds of people.
All the points he was making were very, very true, especially the thing about these profiles he's talking about, where they pretend to be one thing, they do something else and all that.
He did bring up the Al-Aqsa building, which is just at the bottom or just next to the Rock of the Golden Dome Temple.
And that's the focal point, is that when that temple gets destroyed, It has to be protected above all else and all the other places because it's so sacred and the other areas in Jerusalem.
Once it's destroyed, the Hebrews and the rabbis and the high priests and all that are already prepared for a third temple.
That's the mark of a special part in the Bible of the apocalypse or the second coming of Christ and all these other issues going on.
Yet politically, they're always going back and forth.
Well, if they wanted to destroy something, that would be one of the places they would do it, but yet Israel protects it.
It would be like us also protecting Mecca, where the stone is over in Mecca, which is a very sacred site to the Muslims.
But yet, as long as, and this is almost a communist agenda, but The Muslims are in the same mindset.
As long as one-third of their population is left to populate and repopulate and start over again, that's all they're worried about.
If it goes beyond two-thirds, they're killed off, then it's total destruction.
So you see, they have this agenda behind all this.
Well, they're willing to accept certain fatalities and certain losses, as long as they can still perpetuate their belief system and then take over the world.
It's a communist agenda, basically.
Same thing.
But Mr. Finkelstein, not to be confused with that other interview, Abe Finkelstein with James Wickstrom, very interesting.
I've dealt with some of these crazy people before, too.
Some.
Not all, but some, if you want to be correct.
So he's got some very excellent points.
Very excellent.
He's right on target.
Oh, I think he's one of the absolute best, most authoritative commentators on Israel in the world today.
Meanwhile, US diplomacy has thwarted a Palestinian membership.
In other words, a proposal to have a state of Palestine.
Why are we not surprised?
Again, further confirmation that our government is really being run in terms of foreign policy by Bibi Netanyahu.
As the United Nations Security Council gears up for a critical role on Palestine bid for full membership, leaked cables reveal a stark contradiction in US policy.
Despite public assertions supporting Palestinian statehood, the Biden admin is covertly pressuring nations to reject Palestine's application.
This diplomatic maneuvering seeks to avoid a U.S.
veto, which would publicly align the country against Palestinian self-determination.
The quest for Palestinian membership in the UN is not new.
With efforts stretching back over a decade, currently, the Palestinian Authority under President Mohamed Abbas has revitalized its campaign amid significant regional turmoil.
Leaked cables obtained by the Intercept detail vigorous U.S.
lobbying efforts against its membership, targeting Security Council members, including Malta, the current Council President, Ecuador, One cable explicitly urges these nations to oppose any Security Council resolution admitting Palestine contradicting the public stance of the U.S.
supporting a two-state solution.
The Biden admin argues that normalization agreement between Israel and its neighbor present a faster route to peace than UN recognition of Palestinian statehood.
I just find it shameless and embarrassing that the United States becomes so hypocritical and imposes so many double standards on so many issues at home and abroad, John.
It is insulting.
It is embarrassing.
It's a disgrace.
Well, it's a secret operation.
It's a proxy war.
I keep thinking CIA, Langley, Langley.
It's a proxy war.
They're lying to us about everything.
The money that is allegedly going over to the war in the Ukraine, here's another good supposition or theory, is that not only is money being funneled to the Ukraine, it's being funneled to other factions in Israel.
Other countries in that area to keep the war going.
I mean, how many times have you heard in the past where certain senators like Lindsey Graham or John McCain went over to visit terrorists in the Middle East?
And they supported them.
They said, we will give you money.
We will give you weapons and arms.
We will support you.
They won't even do that for people in the United States for whatever sake.
It's amazing what they're doing.
So they'll lie to our faces.
They'll make it look like a war in the Ukraine.
And there may be a war in the Ukraine, but they're still funneling money while they're doing the same excuse in the Gaza.
They're still funneling money.
So no matter where people think the money's going, they need to think a third category of where they don't know it's going.
That's what they're doing.
So it's always a money-making operation.
Ukraine, Gaza, and we have boots on the ground in Haiti.
That's in the last 30 days legally or legitimately stated.
So people need to wake up to this because they're being lied to about all their tax dollars and get back to work seven days a week.
Keep earning those tax slave dollars so they can give it away to other companies and take 10% or 20% off the top.
It's crazy.
It's hot.
It's constantly going nobody's doing anything about it Now here's part and parcel of the explanation for what's really going on here with all this attempt to support Ukraine and nonsense, where there's no American national interest at stake here whatsoever.
It's not AIPAC, the real lobby behind America's undercover unwavering support for Israel.
It's a military-industrial complex.
I mean, think about it.
Most of that money comes right back to Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon, because they are the ones providing the weapons that are being purchased.
Listen to this.
The United States, I think that's the problem.
It's not the other way around.
There's just too much money coming in from the Israeli lobby, whether they be Americans, whether they be, you know, American Christians or American Jews or whoever it is, that is that is funding the support Israel at all costs.
But they're just getting so much money from those political forces that I just don't see them shifting course at all.
Do you think that that money and that money is powerful?
I mean, the majority.
What is it?
A lot of the money is coming from Christian Zionists, but we also have a lot of Jewish billionaires in this country.
I think it's like 30% or something of the billionaires are Jewish, and they're putting pressure.
That's a lot of money that these guys can't give up.
To me, it's the only explanation for their blind allegiance.
It's not about morality.
It's not about ethics.
Everything would point to the opposite of that.
It's instead just about, I don't want to lose my donors.
I don't want to lose the funding.
I don't want to piss off the billionaire class.
It's funny because I actually ended up writing my master's thesis specifically on the Israel lobby and the way it influences policy, and I think it's a little multifaceted.
So there's multiple levels to it.
One, there's no question that the Christian evangelical base in the United States is very significant, but it's primarily concentrated with influence in the Republican Party.
When George W. Bush was demanding that Israel end its military operations in Jenin back in 2002, When they were causing very significant civilian casualties, it was the Christian right that applied tremendous pressure on the Bush administration to get them to back down and leave Israel alone.
And then you have another component, which is the military corporations.
You know, U.S.
military funding for Israel is effectively a gift back to U.S.
military corporations, because that's where Israel just spends all that money buying weapons from U.S.
military corporations.
So the military establishment is invested in a relationship with Israel, in which Israel is dependent on U.S.
weapons and constantly needs more and more of them.
And then, of course, the last component is the AIPAC component and affiliated billionaires and donors and so on, and their influence on policy.
But what's most interesting to me in the research that I've done on this is that when you look at the track record of confrontations between the Israel lobby and U.S.
administrations, you begin to see a clear pattern.
There are Obviously endless examples, I'm sure you're familiar with most of them, of the Israel lobby pushing the administration to capitulate in the face of a confrontation with Israel.
And we easily point at these and say, oh look, it's an example, clearly the Israel lobby is in charge.
But then you look at a different set of examples in which when Israel challenges real and deep strategic interests that are entrenched in the United States, they don't fare very well.
When Israel wanted to sell missiles, or no, struck an economic deal with North Korea in exchange for North Korea agreeing to not sell missiles to Iran and Syria.
From Israel's perspective, that's a significant national security issue that we don't want large missiles from North Korea being sent to Iran and Syria.
But the U.S.
was so invested in isolating North Korea that they pushed Israel and forced Israel to cancel that economic agreement.
And when Israel tried to sell military technology to China, the U.S.
also got extremely upset.
I think it was in 2005, if I'm not mistaken, refused to meet with Israeli diplomats and Israel had to issue a public apology.
And so you see that when you challenge real strategic interests in the U.S., the conversation does change.
And the problem right now is on the question of Iran, if you were to dig a little bit deeper, The strategic interest of the U.S.
would be threatened by complete and total regional chaos, but it's not in a very clear and surface-level way that anybody is going to immediately raise their antennas.
There's still a bit of ambiguity about what that would actually look like and how it might roll out in practice, that this interest in continuing regional conflict that just keeps the money flowing to military corporations in the U.S.
and that investment in militarism It's a little bit more vague, so it's not clear how that's ultimately going to break.
But certainly, if American policymakers are thinking in a more focused way about what's good for the United States, it is absolutely to put an end to this insane slide towards regional catastrophe and to put an end to what Israel is doing.
And not just in its confrontation with Iran, but putting an end to the onslaught and the slaughter they're committing in Gaza, because that is precisely the driving force that is pushing the entire region to Guy's smart, very smart, excellent comments.
Meanwhile, I don't think there's any doubt that the Speaker of the House is betraying border security for more border aid.
This is really disgusting, given all the promises he made to the Freedom Caucus about how he would perform as Speaker that led them to support him for that role, but now is causing serious thoughts about whether it might not have been a mistake.
The border won't be secured this year after Speaker Mike Johnson proposed a deal breaking border security off from the little leverage Republicans had, leaving it to drift into the void.
Republican leadership plan to pass funding for Ukraine and Israel's war, as well as a bill forcing TikTok to diverge from its Chinese owner.
That's really outrageous because TikTok has been a bastion of real freedom of speech, and it's got nothing to do with China.
Except the Israelis don't like the fact that so many are criticizing Israel for genocide than which nothing could be more justifiable and warranted.
But they don't like it, and of course they call it anti-Semitism, and that kind of absurdity is spread across America.
Even the Congress passing a non-binding resolution redefining anti-Semitism to include any criticism of Israel.
No matter what, I mean, this is just ludicrous!
A bill to seize Russian bank assets and other foreign aid and sanctions, bundling them together to send to the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Oh!
And the Rules Committee, Johnson said Wednesday, will also be posting text on a border security bill that includes the core components of H.R.
200, a separate rule that would allow for amendments.
In other words, by bundling them together, by making border security a necessary condition for foreign aid, The Republicans, the Freedom Caucus had some leverage, which they have now been deprived of by the Speaker by betraying them.
Here's Marjorie Taylor Greene, by the way, talking about this.
You know, let me get her sound.
I'm going to issue a challenge to Mike McCaul and Mike Johnson and everyone.
If you have proof that Vladimir Putin is going to march across Europe, going to go all the way to Kiev, take Poland next, and then keep on going, unclassify it.
Declassify that proof and show it to the American people.
Prove to the American people why they need to send their hard-earned money over there.
Prove it.
I dare you to prove it because you do not have the proof.
And they're not capable of showing it, Steve.
This is the biggest, most repulsive scam, and it's been happening for decades.
And it's all they claim to protect American jobs and to keep the military industrial base going and employed.
And it's all for our economy.
This is not an economy anybody wants.
We don't want an economy built on people's blood and dead bodies in foreign countries.
We want an America first economy.
And from now on, Steve, we're going to we are going to demand it from our Republican leaders.
I don't care if the Speaker's office becomes a revolving door.
If that's exactly what needs to happen.
She is wonderful.
I mean, I want to say God bless you, Marjorie Taylor Greene.
I mean, I'm an agnostic, but I love the woman.
I think she's fabulous.
John, your thoughts?
people in foreign lands while they stab the American people in their face and refuse to protect Americans and fix our problems over here.
She is wonderful.
I mean, I want to say God bless you, Marjorie Taylor Greene.
I mean, I'm an agnostic, but I love the woman.
I think she's fabulous.
John, your thoughts?
She's on fire.
In fact, I called her office the day before yesterday or yesterday because of that stupid vote against Mayorkas, who should have been charged with high treason, and treated accordingly, folks, 18 U.S.C., 2381.
18 U.S.C., 2381.
Look it up.
But Marjorie Taylor Greene, several congressmen and senators, they failed us.
They're failing us.
She's hitting it right on the target again.
About what they're doing.
They're lying to us under the guise of national security.
Well, we can't tell you our secret because that would violate national security.
That's a lie.
That's what they always use it.
So she's right on target.
And that thing about the revolving door.
Yeah, we need to get Johnson out, kick him out, rotate him out and get somebody else in there.
But we're all at risk.
That's that's what Gerald Ford said years ago.
I was just quoting this somebody the other day.
And I protected Gerald Ford at the White House as well, but he said it would happen like this.
The Democrats will get a male president in office, not very competent, if not perfect profile for what Biden is right now, health-wise and so forth.
And then they would put a female as vice president.
That's the only way they're going to get a female into the office of the president.
That's what Gerald Ford said while he was alive years and years ago.
So the point is it still fits.
They know these things behind the scenes, James.
This stuff is always going on, but they don't tell the American public.
They don't want us to know their secrets or how they do the government.
And we're being lied to every day that we get up.
And here's another guy, Mike Johnson.
He's another one of them.
See, it was all a ploy.
Kamala's witness, no one can imagine she could possibly handle responsibility, and obviously the guy in there now is a fake.
We know he's a phony, hasn't got the ability either, but then he's just a stooge, he's just a mouthpiece.
Many believe Obama is pulling the strings day to day, but I say the policy domestically of those are George Soros, and internationally those are Bibi Netanyahu.
Here's Rand Paul hammering GOP Speaker Mike Johnson for pushing foreign aid back.
What do Americans get?
The $95 billion bill provides aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and other American allies.
The text of the three bills that will fund America's national security interests and allies in Israel, the Indo-Pacific, and Ukraine, he texted to House members.
We've taken a Senate supplemental bill and we've improved the process and the policy.
And that's a really important thing Johnson said, but it's ridiculous.
It's ridiculous.
I'm on the air gun.
So the question is, And this is Johnson.
I've just spoken with the House GOP conference on my plan to address national security supplemental legislation.
This week we will consider separate bills.
But Rand Paul criticized the foreign aid package on social media, declaring it a unit party effort that puts America last.
Speaker Johnson and the Uniparty are united behind their laundry list of bad ideas, he wrote, from borrowing $95 billion from China to send it to other countries, to killing a FISA warrant requirement.
They're ticking all the boxes to put America last.
John, I think Rand Paul's got it exactly right, but it's odd to hear you have a senator speaking out against the Speaker of the House.
Your thoughts?
Well, it's exactly that.
He's on target with that, too.
And you just mentioned FISA.
You know, they've always been authorized to lie at the highest levels.
CIA, for example.
The OIG, Office of the Inspector General for most major federal agencies or their internal affairs oversight.
They're not doing it.
And they'll lie to you right to your face saying, oh, well, we need to have access to all these Americans' communications, emails and telephone calls and so forth.
That's a lie and you're not protected and they will monitor you illegally to make sure they did it right to get the information no matter what you know so they can base their decisions on that.
That's why they use the CIA and National Security Agency on these things and military because they have to have a basis of what's really going on.
Even if they take like Peter Navarro who is a Trump staff consultant He was a former U.S.
attorney.
I actually met him in San Diego County.
I won't say where, but it was near a residence and so forth.
They set him up because he wouldn't divulge information on communications with the president.
I'm at Secret Service, and I'm not obligated to divulge information if I talk to the president about something of national security interest.
They're not allowed to have it.
They would have to go through a special, rigorous panel of senators on some sort of intelligence committee to give permission to even ask a question.
And yet they put him in for like, what, five months?
So you're gonna do five months, be a convicted felon, and then when Trump gets into office, I'm assuming, he'll just turn around and pardon him.
Like a lot of other people, he should pardon anyway.
But yeah, the patterns are all there.
People don't get it.
They're lying to us every day, folks.
And they think that this one's gonna be different These guys aren't loading their pockets with money and lying to us.
Marjorie Taylor Greene's good.
John Kennedy's good.
James Comer's good.
Matt Gitts is good.
Josh Hawley is good.
I heard Josh Hawley raking Mayorkas over the coals one time and also some other female corrupt person.
But it all ends up, nothing gets done.
They end up getting their resignation.
That's what they call for.
They demand a resignation.
Get fired.
They're not doing what they used to do back in the old days when they usually take people and arrest them and put them in federal prison pending a trial or not, or Gitmo, which isn't happening, and starting with the executions.
Once they start doing stuff like that again, things will change.
Just my personal opinion.
Go ahead.
Yeah, John.
I know we're coming up on a break, and I'm not hearing it.
So I'm anticipating being given a warning. - Yeah.
We have the media hiding the truth about the Trump trials from the American people.
There's no doubt about that.
These are all phony baloney.
They're all politically driven.
They have no basis in fact or in law.
A study by media research showed that presidents try to gaslight the public into thinking these Stalinist show trials are legitimate by refusing to mention in news stories the fact that Trump prosecutors are all elected Democrats.
The network coverage of the Trump prosecutions routinely and fraudulently imply they are nonpartisan public officials.
It's Trump versus the New York Attorney General or the Manhattan District Attorney.
They're not just Democrats.
They're elected Democrats building a career on taking Trump down.
Leaving that out of the story is irresponsible newsbusters executive editor Tim Graham told Fox News.
I think he's got it exactly right.
We'll be right back after this break.
Thanks, Michael.
you
Thank you.
Thanks, Michael.
Thank you.
Welcome back.
Alan Dershowitz has had some comments to make about the New York trial, where Dershowitz is one of our nation's leading experts on constitutional law.
This continued judicial onslaught by Democrats in power placed a day of reckoning this week by a man who doesn't like Trump, but vehemently defends him under the Constitution.
The unexpected support called for an immediate end to Trump-hating officials continuing their crusade to destroy Trump from the Daily Caller.
Former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz slammed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Briggs' case against Trump for depriving voters of a fair election Tuesday on Fox, adding a presiding judge should absolutely recuse himself.
I'm an American voter who hasn't decided at this point who to vote for and who to vote against.
I just want a fair election.
This case is depriving the American public.
I'm speaking for the American public, not for either candidate, of the right to have a fair election.
Dershowitz said Trump should be campaigning in Pennsylvania instead of forced to sit in a courtroom.
He called the court's decision to remain Trump to the court proceeding unconstitutional, and the case should be challenged by Trump's team.
He argued Trump lawyers should make a motion against a judge's power and equated the overall case as election interference.
He admonished a judge in the case for curtailing Trump's right of free speech.
I think Dershowitz has this exactly right.
And indeed, I believe that he's keeping him there not only to keep him off the campaign trail, but to subject him to excessive Constrained in conditions that are not conducive to his health.
In other words, I believe part of these trials is to physically punish Donald Trump.
By constraining him, he's a very active man, having to sit there patiently, quietly, occasionally nodding off, which in my opinion is expectable and not abnormal in the least, is an unfair abuse of him physically.
So this is a Intellectually, morally, politically abusive of this candidate for President of the United States because the Democrats have nothing else they can bring against him.
They know he's going to clean their clock.
Meanwhile, two jurors have already been booted from the fake New York Trump trial.
The so-called hush money trial of Donald Trump in New York City is already proving to be a gigantic legal train wreck after four days.
They still haven't been able to seat a full jury.
Actually, they did, but they had to excuse one, I believe, because she was worried about being identified.
So the left-wing judge, Juan Merchant, is so eager to convict Trump that he's allowing blatantly biased jurors with Trump derangement syndrome to be seated.
After the first four days, two of the selected jurors have been sworn in by Merchant and were kicked off.
This isn't even the worst jury pool Trump will face this year.
Monday, Trump's lawyers pointed out that one of the jurors had posted celebratory anti-Trump content on her social media pages after the 2020 election was stolen.
You wrote, you had to get in the car to spread the honking cheer.
It's a full dance, full on dance party on 96th Street.
Trump's lawyers were questioning her.
The former president could be seeing the courtroom audibly speaking in the direction of the potential juror.
So Merchant pitched a fit, accusing Trump of trying to intimidate the juror.
The pro-Biden juror insisted she would be fair and impartial.
What horse shit.
Unbelievable.
Meanwhile, in Georgia, DA's are suing to block a rogue prosecutor law, which the Democrats fear can be used against Fannie Willis.
Get this, Epoch Times.
A group of Georgia prosecutors has filed a lawsuit challenging a law that established an oversight commission they argue unfairly curtails their power and undermines the will of voters, but that Georgia Governor Brian Kemp says merely disciplines rogue prosecutors for refusing to uphold the law and prosecute certain crimes.
The coalition of four district attorneys filed the lawsuit in the Fulton County Superior Court on April 16th, challenging the constitution of the Prosecuting Lawyers Qualification Commission, established when Mr. Kemp signed SB 332 into law on March 13th, arguing that community sufferers went out of touch, public prosecutor, but politics and public safety.
He's got that right.
The plaintiffs claim the new commission violates Georgia law, the Georgia Constitution, and the U.S.
Constitution in three ways.
First, it allegedly interferes with prosecutorial discretion and thus infringes on the separation of powers.
Second, it allegedly punishes DAs for articulating the prosecutorial philosophies to communities and thus violates free speech.
allegedly failing to consult with Georgia and prosecuting attorneys counsel.
The commission violates certain Georgia statutes.
John, it's obvious they're just trying to protect themselves, but especially Fannie Willis from being removed because she is a rogue prosecutor under the law, because she is not following the law, because she is conducting a political prosecution, and they want to protect her.
Your thoughts?
Exactly that.
I keep going back to the same comments by Fat Alvin Bragg, P-H-A-T, who has actually bragged about the fact that he didn't care about the statute of limitations when he was going after Trump.
They don't care.
That's the bottom line, Jim.
They don't care.
They are running amok like crazy, and yet nobody's doing anything about that.
What are the judges doing?
They're not doing their jobs.
Prosecutors, anytime you get involved with State or county type cases, then the feds can step in because of judicial misconduct, obstruction of justice, all kinds of federal laws, but they're allowing it to happen.
You see what I mean?
They're wasting our time.
They're wasting Trump's time.
They're getting off on the fact that they're running him around ragged, going from one court BS trial to another.
It's a show.
It's a game.
It's all a put on.
It's a dog and pony show.
They get off on this, the Democrats.
That's exactly what they do.
So there's no respect in it whatsoever.
I've been trained to go to court.
That's what my background is.
And when I see these things about these little incidents about, yeah, they may have dismissed a juror and all these other things.
It's all part of the system, which is corrupt.
They're corrupt.
So it's like it's a waste of our time.
Nobody's doing anything.
You know, what are we going to do?
So we got to wait till the election.
I got to wait till that thing gets handled out.
Once Trump becomes president, he can go back and fire more people than he ever fired before.
But he needs to arrest people.
That is the problem.
You know, that's what I'm asking.
Get me a job with Trump on the campaign or the background stuff or the special committees or whatever.
Even just as a consultant, whoever the president is, doesn't matter.
Whoever gets in there, you know, I'll tell them what they need to do.
But they're not doing it.
There's just too much political play.
It's almost an assumption that they're going to be given immunity no matter what they do.
And if they do whatever they want, they know they can get away with it.
That's why we're in a bad shape with the border, Mallorca's case, and these things with Trump going on, these stupid cases.
They're wasting our time.
John, this is a good one for you.
Blaze is talking about a new film out there called Civil War.
Get this.
Everything the media accuses Trump of doing on the afternoon of January 6, 2021, when he allegedly encourages supporters to invade the Capitol.
Alex Garland's film does over 109 minutes.
The number one movie at the box office is a thinly veiled fantasy about assassinating Donald Trump.
Civil War, written and directed by Alex Garland.
And here they're blocking me.
Let me see if I can pick up a little more here before I get banned.
Now, John, I mean, they're talking about inciting, you know, people to assassinate Trump.
This is how low they have sunk.
I mean, it is just disgusting beyond words.
And, you know, the very idea of of imprisoning Trump.
That's a shocker if they thought it through since he as a former president is entitled to Secret Service protection.
What are they going to do?
Seal off an entire wing so only Trump is there with his Secret Service protection?
John, this is insane!
They won't do it.
That's what I'm telling you.
Trump even made a statement about he'd be willing to be the first president to go to prison or jail.
But they can't do it because he would be at risk.
They can't do it.
It would violate all the Secret Service regulations, rules, policies, and even constitutional laws that would protect the President of the United States, especially under continuity of government, would be like saying, well, gee, maybe we could do that with Obama and Bush and Clinton and put them behind bars.
Uh, so that we could keep them nice and safe or something.
See, but I remember the speech.
Trump did not say anything about invading.
He said about a peaceful pros protest.
And when they tried to put out a clarification statement years ago on January 6th, we're right about that timeframe.
They tried to block it and they tried to abuse that information as well.
So they don't want the truth to come out.
That's deep state tactics right there.
So it's obvious where, or.
Internally right now, but people don't get it.
They're like waiting for a flag or maybe they're waiting for a notice in the mail or an email or something, you know, to do something.
But it's crazy what's happening here.
Yeah, on the legal front, the Supreme Court is questioning the use of the obstruction law in the January 6th riot cases amid concern for overreach.
In other words, so many of those who are prosecuted were it was claiming they were disrupting congressional proceedings when they were had no such intent.
Or here it is.
The Supreme Court recently displayed a noticeable skepticism toward the federal government's application of an obstruction statute.
In the prosecution of individuals involved in the January 6th event, the law originally crafted in the aftermath of the Enron scandal to tie loopholes in financial fraud cases is now at the center of a legal battle concerning the suitability for punishing those who stormed the Capitol during the certification of the 2020 election results.
It actually reached that point of course, it was all designed cleverly to disrupt discussion of election fraud evidence.
Nancy Pelosi was deeply involved, Chuck Schumer, the mayor of Washington, Mark Milley appears to have been involved in not responding to a Trump request that National Guard be sent there to maintain law and order.
They had FBI plants throughout the whole crowd.
Some of them, like Rahab, played a major role in instigating acts that would be regarded as illegal.
John, I mean, the Democratic Party is reduced to the level of a crime family, I mean, or worse.
I mean, this is Stalinist style approaches that ought to have been beneath And a political party in America, but they are not.
They, they resort to these techniques routinely.
Lies, deception, deceit, even murder is not beyond them.
And of course, in this case, they had the fake shooting of Ashley Babbitt.
I've studied that rather carefully, and there's no way in which that was legit.
That was fake.
So they're using many false flags, you know, within broader false flag context.
Your thoughts?
Yeah, I agree with you.
It's turned into a major crime syndicate for many, many years.
We use the crime families through the CIA for many years.
And I do other research on other aspects of the CIA and people with lots of money like Howard Hughes and his connections.
But what you just said is very correct.
They had the FBI.
At the actual January 6th incident, they bus people in, BLM Antifa people.
It was an operation.
The whole thing was an operation.
And then years later, after Trump gets back in office, if he can get in safely, thank God, or hopefully, then that's what will happen is we'll get the truth.
And, but the problem is nobody has the huevos to arrest the violators at the Capitol, the Senate, the Congress, and the other people involved, people in the FBI, And the government, they actually escorted out agents that looked like agents.
If you put me in a crowd, I'm going to pick out all the agents.
I could do it.
No problem.
And they did.
They'd find a guy, he'd pull out his badge, identify himself.
And he was in a group of cops that were in uniform and riot gear, and they would escort him out.
And of course he had to be armed too, you know, but it's kind of stupid to look around and say, Oh, those guys are wearing their khaki pants.
in their FBI field uniform outfits when they're not working in a cover thing.
But it's just an observation.
But the thing is, they're pulling all this stuff up.
Owen Schroer actually spent, I think, 30 days or more, whatever it was, for contempt of Congress and interrupted Jerry Nagler.
What's his name?
Nagler?
Nadler.
Nadler.
I'm sorry.
And he got like 30 days contempt of Congress or whatever because he disrupted a meeting.
Those people have already served that ten times over.
Two years.
Over two years, going on three years, and yet nobody's done anything.
Time served.
But then they need to get their appeal.
But there are people who are elderly, they're in bad health, and they're trying to get people to switch them over, to snitch them out.
And that's a tactic by the communist countries and other South American countries with communist rule type stuff.
We've turned into a banana republic, basically.
There's so much evidence on every hand.
Here's a nasty report.
Epidemic of 15 to 19 year olds dropping dead in schools and dorms across USA and Canada in April of 2023.
Global research, very responsible venue.
They go through and they give just one kid after another who's dropped dead.
I mean, these are kids, young people.
15, 19, you know, 18, and all across the board, 16.
I mean, one high school kid after another, 17.
They're dropping dead.
And what's another story here?
Court rules that government can vaccinate your kids by force without your consent.
How grotesque is this?
Especially when we know that the vaccine is causing all these untimely deaths.
Court rules.
A North Carolina Court of Appeals has ruled it's perfectly fine for the government to inject your child with a COVID shot, even if you do not give parental consent.
The court ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, Congress passed in 2005, supersedes all your rights as a parent.
Even though the court admitted the actions of a clinic in North Carolina were egregious, when they forcibly injected a 14-year-old, it still unanimously ruled that the government was within its right to do so.
Every parent needs to hear about this case.
You see those gummies there?
Yeah.
The advertisement for CBD gummies.
And I'm going to tell you right now, the picture shows a child off to the left, And what you just said ties in that they're going to try to give shots without your permission.
The next thing that they'll be doing is they're going to be putting the stuff in the food supplies.
Oh, it's like the CBD gummy advertisement.
They'll put out a deal and make it a COVID shot in a gummy or something.
So they'll do anything they can to kill people off.
And it's getting to that.
We're looking at mass population destruction.
Yeah.
Well, here's the case.
The minor child was.
Tanner Smith, attending Western Guilford High School in Greensboro, North Carolina, three years ago.
The school sent parents a letter informing them Tanner might have been exposed to COVID by another student and he would need to be tested.
The school said he would not be able to return to football practice until cleared by a public health professional.
The letter said the school would be hosting a free testing clinic the following day, noted Consent for testing is required.
Henry's stepfather took him to a clinic so he could be tested and returned to football practice.
The school had not informed the parents.
There was also a vaccination clinic going on at the same time.
Tanner filled out a form he thought was for the free testing as his stepfather waited outside.
The clinic tried to call his mother but couldn't reach her.
They never sought to contact his stepfather right outside the building.
He made it very clear he was there for a COVID test, not a COVID shot.
One of the clinic workers said, give it to him anyway.
Despite parental consent, they committed an act of medical rape against a 14-year-old boy by forcibly injecting him with a Pfizer shot.
The parents were furious when they found out what happened and filed a lawsuit against the school district and the clinic for battery against a child, violation of the mother's constitutional liberty and parental rights, violation of standard bodily autonomy, and violating the plaintiff's federal constitutional rights.
The trial court ruled the PREP Act shielded the school district and clinic workers from liability.
The family appealed and the state appellate court upheld the trial court ruling.
Disgusting, disgusting.
John, I think we may be right at the verge.
Go ahead.
No, we got a couple of minutes more.
Go ahead.
I was just thinking as you said that.
I remember some undercover cameras that were shot at some of the schools, elementary schools, and they literally had National Guard in their BDUs, their digital camouflage, assisting nurses in a tent outside of a gymnasium so they could line people up, go in, get your shot, and then get released back to your class or whatever by the aid of National Guard.
Well, National Guard may assist in certain things.
There are disasters, food, water, Shelter and supplies.
I get that.
Also, just to make a little interesting point, when you said that it was illegal for them to do what they did, I believe that.
But I think it was a famous Alan Dershowitz, who I've talked to before, made a statement over a couple of years ago that he thought that it was not a right to deny the shot.
In other words, he think the government had a right You've got to have informed consent for these medical procedures.
This was an experimental medicine that could only be applied if there were not readily available alternatives.
both ivermectin and HCQ were readily available.
Thus, it was a campaign of demonization against ivermectin, which is virtually a miracle drug, and HCQ, to promote the experimental.
But the right to informed consent, I'm telling you all the risks, the pros and the cons of taking, they were claiming it was safe and effective.
It doesn't have anything to do with that transmissibility.
It doesn't cure COVID.
What it does is weaken your immune system and make you vulnerable to diseases and maladies that your body's been successfully coping with in the past.
And indeed, we have a late report that Pfizer has even admitted it has nanobots that change your DNA.
John, this is grotesque beyond words.
That's what they're doing.
They're going down to the level of the DNA itself, which they have the codes to go in.
I tell people about Ivermectin, I told people just this morning, and if you take it, my friend Nick in Paris, he takes it also because it opens up the capillaries so you get more oxygen to your brain, your heart and your eyes and your other important organs.
They don't want us to know that.
That's why they put resistance up.
That's why Biden tried to block it at the border from coming in.
You can order it from India.
People want to contact me offline.
At my email, john.a.karman at gmail.com, I can tell them how to order it from India Mart in India.
You know, like $75 for 1,000 pills, 12 milligram pills.
But it's going down to that.
I have a DARPA contact.
We talk about this stuff at the cellular level where they put stuff in the system so they can break it down and it actually damages the body.
So they're still doing a mass killing or genocide, 5 to 7 billion.
So they can rid the planet of all these other people.
And they don't care about the benefits of the people that are really smart, intelligent, and can contribute all kinds of things to mankind.
You know, it's so serious.
Everything you've said about this is right on target.
John, let me just toss in for good measure here.
We had this recent film called The Truth vs. Alex Jones.
I've watched it.
I've been critiquing it.
It's rubbish.
It misrepresents all the facts, and it's based on a claim by an attorney who appears in the film that Alex Jones could not legally talk about Sandy Hook and issue what he was claiming to be a lie.
Well, Alex Jones believed what he said at the time, therefore it can't have been a lie.
A lie involves deliberately asserting something you know to be false as though it were true to mislead a target audience.
He wasn't doing that.
So not only that, but it turns out that in 2003, Fox lawyers, subjected to a lawsuit, argued it was their First Amendment right to report false information, and they won in court in 2003, which meant The media can legally lie.
Here's the proof.
False lawyers said it was their First Amendment right to report false information and won.
I mean, look, how can you have a truth-falsity if there are conflicting opinions about everything?
That means that roughly half the opinions are going to be false.
Half are going to be true.
We don't know.
It's a process of engaging in debate and discussion that enables us to better sort out the true from the false.
If you had a truth requirement for free speech, you couldn't say anything at all unless you were able to prove it to be true.
I mean, what a grotesque infringement.
So this whole video, this thing, the truth versus Alex Jones is complete hypocrisy.
It's completely fraudulent.
Go to my blog at jameshfetzer.org and check it out, and you'll find you can download for free The redacted version of my book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
You can download that for free from my blog.
And I want to thank you all for being here.
John, you were excellent.
I so appreciate it.
Spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends and people you love and care about, because we do not know how much time we have left.
And support RBN.
Have a great weekend.
Thanks, Jim.
▲
Export Selection