All Episodes
Previous Next
April 5, 2025 - Jim Fetzer
01:02:37
News w/ The Fetz! (4 April 2025) with John Coleman of the Apocatastasis Institute
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello, everyone.
I'm John Coleman from Apocastastasis, an Institute for the Humanities, an alternative college and high school here on New Milford, Connecticut, USA.
This broadcast is our latest installment of News with the Fets with Dr. James Fetzer, and we're going to do a rundown of so many topics going on in the world.
For reference, this recording and broadcast, thanks to your donations, live broadcast, is being done on the 4th of April in 2025.
And before Dr. Fetzer treats us to the rundown of events far and near, just one announcement for the college here, and that is to consider enrolling in our Forever Forge course taught by Professor Lorenzo Malloway.
And you can find out all about that and how to recap.
Sure. That original idealism that somewhere along the line in childhood and in our schooling we lost.
So anyway, that's on the front page of our site.
And without further ado, welcome, Dr. Fetzer.
John, it's always a pleasure to join you.
I wish the news were less grim.
We have to confront the reality if we are to understand the situation we're in and take such action as maybe within our...
Range of capabilities to improve it.
Trump is about to bomb Iran.
Top Israeli sources reveal planned attack on nuclear sites and delivering chilling.
War is coming warning.
This is very disturbing, especially because the reported grounds for the attack is a fabrication, a falsehood that's long been promulgated by Bibi Netanyahu.
Trump is about to bomb Iran.
Top Israeli sources reveal planned attack on nuclear sites and deliver chilling war is coming warning.
This morning, the world's focus is on Donald Trump's decision to launch a global trade war.
But in a few weeks' time, the man who last month pledged to deliver peace through strength is planning to embark on a real war.
I'm currently in Tel Aviv, and according to several...
The United States and Israel are preparing to launch a strike on Iran that will finally eradicate the threat posed by the country's nuclear weapons program.
What's fascinating, John, is they don't have a nuclear weapons program.
They have a peaceful nuclear energy program.
So this is total fraud and deception.
A week ago, the U.S. deployed a trio of V2 Spirit stealth bombers, accompanied by long-range refueling assets, to its Diego Garcia island base in the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean, bringing the total strength of the bomber force there to seven.
The U.S. only had 19 of these things.
They run a half a billion apiece.
John, putting seven together is stunning.
This is significant because it's rare to see such a major concentration of these sophisticated assets.
There's still a possibility Iran could back down in the face of Trump's ultimatum, but I guarantee you it ain't gonna happen.
A senior British diplomatic source I spoke to expressed optimism.
Even if the Iranians were to grant significant concessions, there's no guarantee it would stay Israel's hand.
Instead of forcing Israel to stop the onslaught on Gaza, the Israelis forced Trump to bomb Iran.
Now, here's the location here.
It's roughly 3,000 miles.
History records when NATO attacked Yugoslavia in March of 1999, the U.S. sent three B-2L bombers during the 78 days.
A bombing that crushed that country and broke it apart.
That's three for Yugoslavia, but now we have seven for Iran.
Meanwhile, Tulsi says Iran not believed to be building a nuclear weapon.
The United States intelligence community has assessed Iran is not currently building a nuclear weapon, according to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
Speaking before the Senate Intel Committee, Gabbard stated, the intel community continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapon program he has suspended.
In 2003, Iran's nuclear program has long been a focal point of U.S. foreign policy with concerns over regional security and global non-proliferation.
Gabbard's statement comes amid heightened tensions in the Middle East, ongoing U.S. sanctions, and recent military confrontations involving Israel.
President Donald Trump has also instituted a Maximum pressure campaign against Iran over its nuclear program.
But the U.S. has not ruled out military action.
Iran's nuclear program has been under scrutiny since the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a deal signed by world powers to limit Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions released.
Iran, by the way, conformed to all the conditions of that agreement.
They allowed inspectors in.
It was working completely successfully.
No violations whatsoever by Iran.
Nevertheless, the U.S. withdrew from the agreement in 2018 under Trump, reimposing sanctions leading to increased tension in Iran, exceeding its...
Uranium enrichment limits.
While former President Biden sought to revive the deal, negotiations stalled, and Trump's second term policies have further tightened sanctions.
Meanwhile, here we have from Hal Turner.
Moscow is condemned for not warning to bomb Iran if it refuses a new nuclear deal, calling it an unacceptable ultimatum.
Iran is now considering a preemptive strike at Diego Garcia.
Now, for those who may be unaware, under international law, the UN Charter, a nation confronting an imminent strike, if it's about to be attacked, has a legal right to preempt, to launch a strike, to nullify, or respond to the threat posed.
Iran is contemplating doing that.
Personal opinion is, by hitting Diego Garcia, you eliminate a vast arsenal of weaponry that's about to be launched against Iran in an isolated location where there's virtually no collateral damage, civilians, infrastructure, and the like.
I, therefore, endorse a preemptive strike by Iran.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rabkov.
Said U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure would destabilize the entire region and earn Washington to de-escalate.
Trump's message was clear.
No deal means unprecedented bombing and renewed sanctions.
This is part of his bullying, thuggish foreign policy, which I condemn from beginning to end.
Tehran rejected talks, prompting Trump to say, It will be bombing the lives of which they have never seen.
Senior Iranian military officials are reporting advocating for a preemptive strike on the base, citing concerns that may soon be used as a launchpad for operation against Iran, which is 100% correct.
Russia and China are allies of Iran.
An attack on Iran is an attack on those two countries.
Prepare for war.
Meanwhile, Iran has released information about what it claims is its new plasma weapons.
These have the effect of instantly demolishing the weapons they hit.
If it's a ballistic missile, it is evaporated.
It's not laser-based.
And it said that now only Iran has perfected the technology.
Could this be a game changer?
A hot war with Iran could trigger an inflation apocalypse, but so do May Trump's new tariff policies.
Retaliation by Iran could choke off key oil routes such as the Strait of Urbuz and Bab al-Bandab in the Red Sea, crippling the world's oil supply.
global energy experts have observed.
This would immediately impact 20 million barrels of oil a day, 77 million tons of quaternary liquid natural gas passing through the Strait of Hormuz.
Brent crude oil price could initially surge 110 and 15 a barrel, same with a blight liquid natural gas with Europe hit the hardest.
Global economy growth could be cut by two to 3% if the disruption lasts two to three months.
Now, I frankly believe this kind of war isn't going to happen super fast.
What's the missile start to fly?
It's not going to be two or three months enduring before we see what has happened and who has prevailed.
A conflict with Iran amid a tariff war could set off inflation spiral impacting every American household.
Why? Because the U.S. is highly dependent on imports of $4 trillion worth of goods in 2024.
The U.S. manufacturing sector has been shrinking for years, hitting 10% of GDP in 2024 compared with 30% for China.
The Fed upwardly revised its target for inflation in 2025 from 2.5 to 2.7%.
It also reduced its target for U.S. growth rate in 2025 from 2.1 to 1.7.
Blaming its revisions on Trump's terrorists.
Meanwhile, an update.
The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has issued travel warnings for all Israelis traveling abroad.
In addition, the Israeli Air Force has announced exit restrictions from all air bases in the country, with no personnel allowed to leave.
This morning, the chief of the U.S. Central Command met with Israeli military leaders at the Kira Military fortress in Jerusalem used to control all Israeli military ops.
John, I don't know if you would care to comment on that, but I think the situation is dire.
Yes, I mean, so much to say about that.
First of all, the past decade I've been quite impressed by the patience of the Persians, of the Iranians, for constant provocations.
And you know this as well, Dr. Fetzer, the amount of scientists they've had blown up and assassinated General Soleimani and to maintain their composure so long.
But it is...
You can only poke someone for so long, as you point out with Diego Garcia and an impending attack.
It's a tremendous disappointment as well for me to see Trump and the MAGA movement being sucked into imperialism.
Again, we thought, my goodness, I thought we were done with these people, these neocons.
I thought during the first Trump administration, my goodness, that horrible neocon nightmare was over.
And here they come back.
Seven devils worse than the first with Biden and now with Trump too.
It's a great disappointment and hopefully cooler heads will prevail.
Well said.
Meanwhile, the New York Times has a blockbuster article to prepare Americans for defeat in Ukraine.
A Mark 29 article on America's involvement in the war by Adam Entous reveals that America was woven into the war.
Far more intimately and broadly than previously understood.
Understood is a euphemism.
It means the American and global public were lied to.
The article reveals the war in Ukraine truly was, as former British PM Boris Johnson and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio have said, a proxy war against Russia.
U.S. military and intel were involved at every stage of the war, including supplying the weapons, the training, the planning, the war gaming, the intel, and the targeting.
They were involved in everything from the big picture to the minute detail.
A vast American intel collection effort both guided big picture battle strategy and funneled precise targeting information down to Ukrainian soldiers in the field.
American military and intel provided intelligence about Russian battlefield position movements and intentions.
Every morning, officers recalled, Ukrainians and military gathered to survey Russian weapon system ground forces and determine the ripest high-value targets.
A European intel chief discovered how deeply In mesh, the U.S. was at battlefield operation.
He marveled that they are part of everything now.
None of this is really new.
For those paying close attention to news and not to propaganda and repeated assurances and talking points, this information was readily available.
Even the Times itself had reported much.
The end to its piece adds many names and significant details.
But it's not a revelation that the U.S. was not only supplying the Ukrainian Armed Forces with the weapons, but feeding them the intel.
I gotta say, it may not be the most, but it comes as somewhat of a surprise to me in terms of extent and detail of involvement.
But beneath the supposed bombshell, important nuggets are exposed deserving more attention again, though not entirely new.
The beast opens with a revelation intended as dramatic narrative rather than investigative journalism.
At early in the war, NATO troops were on the ground in Ukraine.
NATO troops in the dramatic description of a clandestine convoy smuggling two Ukrainian generals across a Polish border to meet with American intel and military officials to forge What would become one of the most guarded secrets of the war in Ukraine?
The Times reveals a convoy was manned by British commandos, out of uniform but heavily armed.
They would therefore be subject to immediate execution, by the way, not having the protection of prisoners of war because this was a deceptive involvement of outside forces equivalent to mercenaries.
That's not entirely news.
Nor is it entirely news that an American military advisor would dispatch to Kiev.
They call it Kiev, but I insist on Kiev, which is a historic name and where Kiev was the capital of Russia historically.
It may be news that the Biden admin sent a small team, about a dozen officers, to Kiev, easing the prohibition on American boots on Ukrainian ground and then to build confidence and coordination.
They more than tripled the number of officers in Kiev to about three dozen.
They could now plainly be their advisors, even though they'd been confined to the Kiev area, but it's significant.
CIA was also authorized to send officers to the Kharkiv region to assess Ukrainian counterparts with ops inside the box.
Inside the box means inside Russia.
The unthinkable had become real.
The U.S. was now woven into the killing of Russian soldiers on sovereign Russian soil.
Soon, military advisers would be dispatched to command posts closer to the fighting.
This is all a violation of international law and justifies Russia even in attacking America as complicit in a war being fought against them on their own soil.
But creeping closer to the front of U.S. military advisors since how far the U.S. stretched its restrictions and became involved in strikes inside Russia.
It began with Crimea, regarded by Russians as their own.
American intel and targeting info allowed the killing of Russian generals.
With leeway to act within Crimea itself, CIA supported a massive attack by maritime drones on the Russian Black Sea fleet.
Later, U.S. military and CIA would help plan and support a campaign of Ukrainian strikes in Russia-annexed Crimea.
In an operation codenamed Lunar Hail, the Biden admin authorized Ukraine to attack Crimea with long-range missiles and drones with the aim of forcing Russia to pull their military infrastructure out of Crimea.
The U.S. would select the targets and oversee virtually every aspect of each strike, from determining the coordinates to calculating the missile's flight path.
Biden had been even authorized the military and secret work with the Ukrainians and the British on a blueprint for bringing the Kursk Strait Bridge down.
By the end, the military and CIA received a green light to enable pinpoint strike deep inside Russia itself.
Since CIA was not allowed to provide targeting info inside Russian territory in an act of sophistry, the admin would let CIA request variances, carve-outs, authorizing the spy agency to support strikes inside Russia to achieve specific objectives.
The CIA provided details on Russian vulnerabilities as well as intel on Russian defense systems.
They calculated how many drones the op would require and chartered their circuitous flight paths.
The Times article reveals, perhaps in clearer detail than before, how these escalations recklessly led the Biden admin to repeatedly cross red lines.
Creating consequences that had them genuinely concerned about World War III and even nuclear war.
When the U.S. first provided longer-range HIMARS rocket system, which rely on U.S. satellites for their flight path, a U.S. official reflected that.
The moment felt like standing on that line wondering, if you take a step forward, is World War III going to break out?
And there are calculations.
The U.S. new Russian nuclear doctrine hypothetically allows for the use of nukes if the very existence of the state is threatened.
They do, too, that Russia can secure Crimea to be part of the Russian state.
U.S. intel had overheard Russian-Ukrainian supervisor General Sergei Servot talking about using tactical nukes to prevent Ukrainians from crossing the Dnipro and making a beeline to Crimea.
Estimating it would raise the chance of Russia's using nukes in Ukraine to 50%.
The Biden admin authorized Operation Lunar Hail anyway.
They would repeat the risk with the introduction of the long-range attack known as, knowing that Russia's military chief, General Gerasimov, had indirectly referred to them the previous May when he warned.
General Milley that anything with their long range would be breaking a red line.
The final red line would be crossed when the CIA was authorized to support long-range missile and drone strikes into Russia.
In addition to the reckless flirtation with World War III and a nuclear war for which history should hold the Biden admin accountable, the Times revealed another cynical nugget.
Not previously been sufficiently reported.
The war against Russian Ukraine was a grand experiment in war fighting.
One that would not only help the Ukrainians, but reward the Americans with lessons for future wars.
In an episode, it meant more as poignant drama than investigative journalism.
And Deuce misses the significance of his own reporting.
At Lieutenant General Christopher Donahue, head of Coalition Supporting Ukraine, ended his deployment and prepared to leave, he presented Ukrainian General Zabrosky a gift and said thanks.
When the Ukrainian general asked him, why are you thanking me?
I should thank you.
Donahue explained, Ukrainians were the one fighting and thereby testing American equipment and tactics and sharing lessons learned thanks to you.
We built all these things that we never could have.
Missing from the story is that the Russian Armed Forces also met and adapted to the most advanced American systems, learning how to defend against and eliminate many of them.
The Times article is characterized by other oddities, as Joffrey Roberts, Professor Emeritus of History at University College Court, pointed out to me.
In interest's account, the Russian Armed Forces play no role in a peculiar narrative that differs significantly from more authoritative ones, like the one told in the relevant chapters of the Routledge Handbook of Soviet and Russian Military Studies, edited by Alexander Hill.
The incompetent Russian Armed Forces are only ever reactive.
They are missing from the story.
The Russians have no battlefield successes, only passive responses to Ukrainian failures.
Now, bear in mind, just in terms of body count, Ukraine has lost over a million, while Russia, between 100,000 and 150,000.
It's been very lopsided.
But the Russians have prevailed again and again and again, and have successfully won the war.
The war has been swung decisively in Russia's favor.
The American-Ukrainian partnership is portrayed as yielding triumph upon triumph.
Even most of Ukraine's catastrophic failures are presented as yielding some success.
In the face of partnership victories, Russian forces' morale plummeted.
And with it, there will defy an odd account of a war Russia is winning.
Perhaps most importantly, the article read like a history intended to prepare the American public for defeat in Ukraine.
Every victory is credited to America.
Every defeat blamed on Ukraine.
To read the article is to learn that Ukraine would have won the war had they only listened to the Americans.
The Time article is flipping of the script.
Ukraine has blamed the U.S. for its failure, pointing to...
Failing to keep his promise of whatever they need for as long as they need it, Zelensky may admit his Ukrainian victory plan to allow him to claim he has begged the U.S. to keep his promise to no avail.
They had broken their promise in abandoning him, leaving no choice but to concede defeat and turn to negotiations.
The Times flips the script.
The U.S. did everything they could, but the Ukrainians wouldn't listen.
That's why the war was lost.
And now we have no choice but to force negotiations.
There are too many examples of U.S. receiving credit for every victory and Ukraine blamed for every failure to quote them all.
The Americans, we're told, sometimes couldn't understand why the Ukrainians didn't simply accept good advice.
An American general told a Ukrainian, I love your country, but if you don't do this, you're going to lose the war.
The humble general reports he gets it, but he's not the supreme commander.
And I'm not a president of Ukraine on another occasion, the same American generals are the Ukrainians.
You can slava Ukraine all you want with other people.
I don't care how brave you are.
Look at the numbers while he was walking him through a battle plan.
While the Ukrainian armed force had an important early victory against Russian soldiers attempting to build a bridge that could cross over a river, unspoken was that the Americans had supplied the points of interest to targets to thwart the Russian assault.
Time and again, when battles failed, it was because the Americans were informed the order of battle had changed or Ukrainian generals had other plans.
Or the Americans were not told the beating's outcome.
That's not the plan!
The exasperated American general would cry.
All we kept thinking was, this is not great.
The Americans meticulously laid out each operation, but each time they failed, it was because the Ukrainians wavered, or their generals wouldn't budge, or when the generals were begging the Ukrainian general to move his brigade forward.
The Ukrainian commander hesitated.
The crucial counteroffensive failed because the key was getting the counteroffensive on schedule.
But the drop-dead date came and went because Ukrainians wouldn't commit.
A frustrated senior U.S. official said, we should have walked away.
Later, mission would fail because out of caution and deficit of trust, Ukrainian commanders would now first use drones to confirm U.S. intel costing precious time.
In the end, Ukraine fell short because they weren't willing to do what was necessary to help themselves prevail by drafting people as young as 18, despite all the legitimate reason for not doing so, to which the Americans were deaf because they prioritized their goals in the war over Ukraine's concerns.
Later, mission would fail because out of caution and a deficit of trust, Ukrainian commanders would now first use drones.
The New York Times article reveals many gems, sometimes not the ones it set out to reveal.
It's cataloging just how much the U.S. was woven into the war should also, as Anatole Levin, director of the Eurasia program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, suggested to me, Remind the Europeans with their ambitious ideas of continuing to support the war without America how crucial USAID has been,
but the most important revelation is that the first significant public attempt to prepare Americans for defeating a war that cost them billions of dollars and the Ukrainians hundreds of thousands of casualties and lives.
John, your thoughts?
You had said, Dr. Fetzer, that Ukrainian defeats are often presented as having some silver lining.
And I will give an example of that.
During the Kursk Offensive to recapture Crimea, which Russia is never going to give back.
Russia is never going to give up Crimea.
So this is being delusional on the part of NATO and the West to think that this is going to return to the pre-2014 borders.
But anyway, the Kursk Offensive.
It was late, as you referenced here in the article.
It was very late.
They were building up to it and building up to it, and finally it did get off the ground.
And the Russians, completely lost in the West, is that Russian military doctrine is based on artillery, and it's based on long slogs of artillery going back 400 years.
So what the Russians had done in Crimea is built three rows of fighting positions.
And then in front of that, they had fortified various villages for 20 miles.
Long story short, tragic story short, the whole summer of fighting in the Kursk offensive, the poor Ukrainian army.
I'm just I'm having some sympathy for the men on the ground soldiers.
These men were thrown away.
They fought and they never even made it.
Here's the point.
They never even made it to the first actual line of resistance of the Russians.
Just the fortified villages.
And yet, that was paper over here in the West, and it was, you know, Slava Ukrania, and look at our brave boys, or look at those brave boys, I guess.
And what a waste of life, and the propaganda of it all.
And now you can see the New York Times, and now they have to shimmy-shammy and get everyone ready for the fact that the war is over and the West lost.
That's wonderful.
Very, very nice critique, John.
I'm impressed.
Meanwhile, does the First Amendment come with an Israeli exception?
It's really astounding how we're surrendering freedom of speech on behalf of deference to a foreign power.
Earlier this month, Miami Beach Mayor Stephen Miner introduced a resolution threatening to cancel the old cinema's lease.
The theater's crime?
Showing? No Other Land, a documentary about the Israeli occupation of Palestinian villages in the West Bank.
About a week after the film won the Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature, Miner condemned it as a false one-sided propaganda attack on the Jewish people, not consistent with the values of our city and residents.
He also wrote, The film director's comments at the Oscars prove the anti-Semitic nature of the film, using Jew hatred, propaganda, and lies, such as ethnic cleansing.
How is this alive?
We've been watching this on and on ad nauseum on the news and videos.
The slaughter is going on extremely, even Donald Trump the president.
I propose moving all the Palestinians out of Gaza, the U.S. taking control and turning it into the Riviera of the Mediterranean.
It's a fact.
Unfortunately, Jews for thousands of years have heard this anti-Semitic rhetoric.
I'm just surprised that Ocinema, utilizing Miami Beach taxpayer funding, would willingly disseminate such hateful propaganda and remember her.
Miami Beach has an overwhelmingly Jewish population.
To its shame, the old cinema initially agreed to remove the film from its programming, but a day later reversed course, claiming its earlier response was made under deracing, citing its fundamental belief that every voice deserves to be heard.
Minor withdrew his resolution after five city councilmen stated their opposition.
Any... Said it should instead focus on encouraging the theater to show films that reflect differing perspectives on the occupation.
There's more to it, but I'm going to finesse it for the sake of a very disturbing article.
Henry Macau, who's himself Jewish, but has been extremely critical of the Israeli genocide.
is seeking to explain why Donald Trump has become so deferential after campaigning, yet he would end these stupid wars.
And now he's increasing them, where Iran poses no threat to the United States, but has been the long-standing objective of hatred by Bibi Netanyahu, who has exaggerated its capacity to develop nuclear weapons for some 30 years now, and has even boasted, About controlling America and its activities in the Middle East.
Henry suggests Trump is a sexually blackmailed Mossad operative.
We cherish our delusions with the inauguration of our Lord and Savior, Donald Trump, in a month.
This was actually published December 15, 2024, prior to the inauguration.
It's important to be reminded of this.
When Mike Pompeo said COVID was a simulation, Trump said, I wish someone had told me.
His role was to pretend to be the good cop by giving the story to his fellow strangers.
Thus, he failed to ensure the integrity of the 2020 election.
In 2017, we wrote, Trump's job is not to lead us to the promised land.
His job is to polarize and divide.
They are all Freemasons.
Trump, Hillary Putin, May, Merkel, George Soros, Netanyahu, most members of Congress, Stalin, Hitler, FDR, Churchill.
The goal is conflict itself.
Gridlock, war, and chaos.
Order of chaos, meaning order out of chaos.
Create a chaotic situation and reshape it to your heart's content.
They are transforming the world.
War and mayhem.
Or how they do it.
Freemasons have divided into communist and Zionist house teams.
Freemasons and Illuminati Jews are on both sides of every conflict.
In case Trump insisted on the true election result, there was sexual blackmail to keep him in check.
Blackmail is the price of admission to the Illuminati.
Trump was false opposition.
If patriots look to him for leadership, they are due.
By Timothy Fitzpatrick.
I'm here to create conflict everywhere.
That's what I do.
Every person in a position of power should be suspected of being controlled through sexual blackmail.
Says a Judeo-Masonic.
Cryptocracy controls virtually every aspect of organized government, the press, and the financial system, to name a few.
You may have heard of the bizarre sexual initiation of Yale's Skull and Bone Secret Society, where the would-be bonesman reveals his sexual secrets to his fellow initiates and initiators.
John, it's lying in a coffin and recounting your sexual history while...
Jerking off in front of the collective group.
From the very start of the societal ascent, you could say a bonesman is blackmailed and falls under the control of the society.
This scenario is played out in virtually every sphere of influence at one degree, pun intended, or another.
As happens.
Both presidential candidates are connected as sexual scandals, the likes of which we shall explore in Trump's life.
This is a much longer article, only a bit here.
He says Katie Johnson trumped Larry Sinclair.
You may recall, Larry Sinclair is a middle-aged white guy who came forward and said he'd given fellatio to Barack Obama on several occasions.
On April 26, 2016, a Katie Johnson filed a rape complaint in a California court.
It offended Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.
The complaint was dismissed by judge due to a lack of plaintiff address, not due to any frivolity of the complaint.
Trump and the bars were quick to dismiss the charge, however, on behalf of the plaintiff.
It could have been due to fear for her life.
On the fourth and final sexual encounter with the defendant, Donald J. Trump, a plaintiff, Katie Johnson, was tied to a bed.
My Defendant Trump then proceeded to forcibly rape Plaintiff Johnson.
During the course of the savage sexual attack, Plaintiff Johnson loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to please wear a condom.
Defendant Trump responded by violently striking Plaintiff Johnson in the face with his open hand and screaming he would do whatever he wanted as he refused to wear protection.
After achieving sexual orgasm, the defendant, Donald J. Trump, put his suit back on.
And when the plaintiff, Katie Johnson, in tears at the defendant, what would happen if he had impregnated her?
The defendant, Trump, grabbed his wallet, threw money at her, and screamed she should use the money to get an effing abortion.
Incidentally, Trump had flip-flopped on his abortion stanza course.
How could Trump ever ban abortion?
What would 13-year-old rape victims do then?
New Jersey lawyer Thomas Francis Meagher revised Johnson case, filed it in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Plaintiff was subject to acts of rape, sexual misconduct, criminal sexual acts, sexual abuse, forcible touching, assault, battery, intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress, duress, false imprisonment.
And threats of death or serious bodily injury by defendants that took place at several parties during the summer months of 1994.
The parties were held by defendant Epstein at a New York City residence being used by defendant Epstein at 9071st Street in Manhattan, known as the Wexler Mansion, which I gather is the largest in Manhattan.
During this period, plaintiff was a minor at age 13. An alleged witness, Tiffany Doe, to the above rape has come forward.
She claims she was paid by Epstein to lure underage girls to Epstein and friend parties with a bait of promised modeling opportunities.
It was at these series of parties I personally witnessed a plaintiff being forced to perform various sexual acts with Donald J. Trump and Mr. Epstein.
Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein were advised, That she was 13 years old.
Tiffany Doe goes on in her affidavit to identify a 12-year-old victim of Trump and Epstein, as well as to witness Epstein making death threats to the girls should they reveal the abuse.
A second witness, the original Jane Doe, previous pseudonym Katie Johnson, corroborates the story of both Johnson and her lure.
The case remains open.
Yet another corroborating detail of Trump's savage sexual history was his own wife, at the time of Ivana, accusing him of raping her in 1989.
Perhaps convenient for Ivana, Ivana somewhat recanted this accusation in July 2015, just in time for his presidential race.
John, I find all this very disturbing.
Yeah, so those are very serious charges, and hopefully very sober and capable researchers will probe them.
They're very serious indeed.
And then often not talked about, even beyond the sexual violence, is the fact that, you know...
These rings, whether it's this P. Diddy thing now or Epstein or other rings as well, there must be tens of thousands of women and probably men as well.
There were boys back then and girls.
Where are they?
Where are they?
And I must suggest that they've been killed.
They've been murdered.
It's not just the sexual stuff, but there's...
Murder going on at these wicked confabs and so forth.
And then something else I would just add to this phenomena, this mystery of evil, is threatening family members too.
I saw just last night, I re-saw a documentary about an infamous event in the 1980s of a man in Pennsylvania who killed himself, a local politician on TV.
You might remember that, Dr. Fetzer.
But that documentary brought up, and this was on the state level, the threatening that goes on of family members' children in terms of, you know, we would hate to have your kids show up dead in a pool.
So there's also that aspect, too, in terms of control.
It's the blackmail, but it's also the threatening of your grandkids and your children and things like that, your wife, whatever.
So this is a whole backside to power that we must acknowledge and, please God, root out.
Oh, John, those were excellent comments.
Meanwhile, Oliver Stone and James DiEugenio on the JFK Files hearing on April Fool's Day in JFK Backup had Moon cover up.
Here's a timestamp bullet point summary.
The Task Force on Declassification of Federal Secrets held a hearing about the JFK Files with Oscar winner Oliver Stone testifying.
Due to its film JFK and the 2021 documentary JFK Revisited, Stone asked the committee to reopen the investigation into Kennedy's assassination, saying the Warren Commission failed miserably to complete a proper investigation.
Stone explained there's no single smoking gun, but rather a cold case with many clues requiring persistent investigation.
On the contrary, there are probably a hundred smoking guns.
That have been documented in my books and publications of the reports of experts I brought together to address them.
The JFK Records Act created the assassination record review board that worked until 1998 uncovering many clues that informed Stone's 2021 documentary JFK Revisited.
That's an exaggeration.
JFK Revisited, which was really run by Jim DiEugenio, who's a mediocrity and I believe a limited hangout guy, was all about the magic military.
There was nothing original there.
Stuff that had been known for 60 years.
There was no point to the film whatsoever.
Stone and his production partner, Jim DiEugenio, discussed evidence challenging the official autopsy.
Clean testimony of 42 witnesses who tested to a large and pulsing wound on the back right side of Kennedy's head, indicating a shot from the front.
But this has been known virtually from the day of the assassination.
DiEugenio believes the back of the head wound evidence was covered up by the Warren Commission and the HSCA because it contradicted the lone gunman theory by suggesting shots came from the run.
Likely the grassy knoll which Oswald couldn't have produced.
DiEugenio called for declassification of all documents about Oswald in Mexico City and New Orleans from summer of 1963, by the way.
They did release the Mexico trip documents previously.
DiEugenio appears not to know, but Larry Rivera has meticulously reviewed them and discovered the whole idea.
I believe visiting the Cuban embassy in Mexico is a fabrication.
We're supposed to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba to make an escape to the Soviet Union, which they claim proved he was the assassin and a communist sympathizer.
But in fact, now, the Dallas police actually did a scan of Oswald's passport, and it stated quite clearly on the scan.
Which was also released in the record as not valid for travel to Cuba.
That was a smoking gun for you, which Jim DiEugenio is oblivious.
He's not competent.
The very idea he should have been testifying before Congress is, in my opinion, absurd.
DiEugenio suggested that the committee should interview remaining people from the Warren Commission, just like people in the Assassination Record Review Board.
About why they couldn't complete their investigations.
Stone questioned the official timeline, signed evidence from three women who saw the assassination from the fourth floor with Supervisor Dorothy Garner witnessing them go downstairs with 40 seconds, challenging the Warren Commission's account of Oswald's supposed movements.
Because he had to have been on the stairs if their account were true and the women were there, but he was not.
The transcript ends with Stone questioning how Oswald could have formed all the action attributed to him in the timeline.
That's just trivial and petty.
Why not point out that the Warren Commission concluded there had been three and only three shots from behind when Malcolm McCullough, when he reported the death of JFK, said it was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head pointing to his right temple, obviously fired from in front.
Or... Go to NBC's reporting the afternoon of the assassination, where they were talking about two wounds, a small clean puncture wound to the throat, where Malcolm Perry, MD, had reported three times it was a wound of entry during the Parkland Press Conference that was held after the announcement of his death by Malcolm Kilduff.
And later in the evening, the shot to the right cam hole attributed Admiral George Merkley to present position.
That obviously had also fired from in front.
Where? When the official FBI Secret Service conclusion of three shots fired from above and behind, one entering JFK's back, one entering Connolly's back, one entering JFK's back of the head start to dribble in.
Frank McGee's nobody's fool says this is incongruous.
How can the...
Men have been shot from in front, from behind.
And if you put together all those shots which were legitimate, each of which fired by a separate shooter, and an additional shot to the side of the head, we have one to the back, fired from the top of the county records building by a Dallas deputy sheriff.
We have the one to Conley, fired from the book depository by Lyndon's personal hitman.
We have the one to the back of the head, fired from the dowel tags by the anti-Castro shooter.
And then we have the shot to the throat that actually passed through the windshield, fired by the joint chief shooter inside the triple underpass.
Then we have the shot of the right temple, fired by the mob hitman who was at the intersection of the picket fence and the triple underpass.
And then near simultaneously, shot to the side of the head, fired by...
Israeli shooter from, I believe, inside the curbside sewer opening.
There you have six shooters already.
And we know there was a seventh CIA shooter who had become a Dallas cop who had a police shot because, although it was easiest with a handgun from the grass, you know it would have hit Jackie, wound up in the grass, picked up by a Dallas police lieutenant.
Where those are.
Seven of the shooters, where the eight was evidently fed on the grass opposite the grassy knoll, who you would not believe could have even been there, but I've seen photographs possessed by two JFK experts showing him standing holding a rifle, two different photographs.
So already we have six different shots.
And here's another smoking gun.
At Parkland, they observed that his side blew out to the back of the head.
But at Bethesda, Commander Humes, who was in charge of the autopsy, took a craniosol and enlarged the wound so it could be claimed to have been from a shot fired from behind if JFK had been leaning extremely forward.
And then when the House Select Committee reinvestigated, they reconstituted the whole back of the head to disappear, to blow it out the back.
How can Oliver Stone not say there aren't any smoking guns?
Here's yet another, and another, and another.
Meanwhile, when you put all the pieces together, you realize each of the sponsors have their own hitman.
The CIA, the Joint Chiefs, Anticastro-Cuban, Mafia, Fed, Texas Army, Israel, and LBJ.
Whether it's shooters, Supervisors and coordinators included George Herbert Walker Bush and Edward Lansdale, an Air Force general who was responsible for assassinations around the world, including Operation Phoenix in Vietnam, who appears to have positioned the shooters and determined the sequence of shots.
So where the facilitators were Lyndon Johnson of the assassination, J. Edgar of the Kovarov, where...
Lyndon appears to have assigned Alan Dulles, former director of the CIA, to be the project manager to put all the pieces together.
Meanwhile, here we have raw news on April 4th, today, talking about how Israel killed the Kennedys.
The Trump admin recently declassified and released some 60,000 government docs related JFK assassination.
Provoking a great deal of discussion on social media and the rest of the internet.
This prompted Mike Whitney to interview me on this subject, providing an excellent opportunity to draw together and summarize many articles I've published from 2008 onward on the infamous historical event.
One of them, by the way, includes a new book that spells out how JFK was taken out of Dallas.
A book by David W. Manick, MD, PhD, who is a leading expert on the medical evidence of the assassination, and Jerome Corsi, PhD, where David identified that third shot to the head.
He seems not to mention that here.
As I explained at length, there's strong, even overwhelming evidence that Israel and Mossad played a central role in the death of our president.
And also killing his younger brother Robert a few years later.
Kennedy had been embroiled in a bitter political battle with Israel over the latter's illegal nuclear weapon development program, a program he had sworn to end.
He was also determined to break the growing power of the Israeli lobby by issuing orders which provided obvious motives for his killing.
He continues, what a tiny handful of Individuals have been willing to discuss the crucial role of the Israeli Mossad in the Kennedy assassination of longtime French conspiracy researcher Laurent Gaillot.
I would strongly recommend his 2019 work, The Unspoken Kennedy Truth is the Best Book, presenting the Israeli Mossad case for the JFK assassination, as I've explained.
They were only one of eight different sponsors of the assassination.
I therefore regard these as Exaggeration.
But they're more telling and important than what Oliver Stone and Jim DiEugenio were telling the Congress.
So I might not necessarily endorse every single element.
This paperback summarizes all the important information or it can easily be read in a day or two.
No, I presented the same controversial material in a 2022 documentary available on YouTube.
Perhaps a little too Hagographic.
It constitutes the best video documentary on that subject.
Here we have Israel and the assassinated Kennedy.
And notice you got J. Edgar and LBJ, whom I've identified as the principal facilitators, where Oliver Stone falsely said to Congress when they confused one of the questioners, Warren Boebert, Confused Roger Stone with Oliver Stone, where Roger has a book about Linden's role behind the assassination as the principal motivator.
He said, no, in his film, he didn't identify LBJ as behind the assassination, but only the cover-up, which is actually even false of his own film.
So it appears to me Oliver Stone has become complicit in the cover-up.
If you want to know more, if you want to get the big picture, check out my real deal JFK special on November 18th, 2021, dedicated to Oliver Stone.
And I sent this to him before he released.
His JFK revisited on 22 November 2021.
His JFK was a masterpiece with three flaws.
He did not know Oswald was in the doorway of the book deposit right at the time that Motorcade passed by.
Or that the Zeb Pruder film had been massively edited.
No doubt because he was relying on advice from Rob Grodin, who's played the JFK community virtually from the beginning.
And he posited three shoot teams when it turned out there had been eight assassins.
My worry is that this sequel...
Which I'm told was screenwritten by Jim DiEugenio.
May suffer from similar defects.
We shall see.
It wasn't even that good, frankly.
It was really superficial and meaningless.
A waste of cinema time and effort.
Well, when I sent it to him, I was hoping he would read it, watch it, but it appears to me from his testimony either.
Did not.
It was deliberately obfuscating.
I have lost my respect for Oliver Stone, and I've only had contempt for Jim DiEugenio from the beginning.
John, your thoughts?
Thank you, Dr. Fetzer.
First of all, for the audience, in addition to what Dr. Fetzer had mentioned on November, his presentation, also on our site we have Dr. Fetzer's presentation, not the same presentation, a similar one, though, on JFK, and you can access that from our recent conference in March.
But to the point in question, I would just reiterate the low character of LBJ and how connected he was to Zionism.
And there's no better proof of that than the disaster, the monstrosity, the crime of what happened to the USS Liberty and how the Johnson administration was complicit in that false flag.
And one of his concubines or his whores was an Israeli spy.
And so you better believe she was feeding all this stuff out, all this pillow talk out to her masters.
So yeah, once again, we're tripping across Israel, in this case in the 60s.
But yeah, there's a connection there, and I do appreciate Dr. Fetzer bringing up the different shooters, too, because the presentations, like Oliver Stone's, maybe don't get all their ducks in a row, to put it nicely.
John, I appreciate those comments.
One good sure argue at Lyndon was, So dedicated to Israel, you could give a larger role to Israel in the assassination, but you need to make that argument.
Oliver Stone was doing the opposite, suggesting his film didn't implicate Lyndon in the assassination, but only the cover-up, which is outrageous and misleading, and for which I now hold him in contempt.
And actually, it strikes me, it just struck me right now, that in the 40s, I believe, the 30s or the 40s, Johnson, I mean, talk about a committed, lifelong Zionist.
Before Israel became a state, he was running guns.
He was involved in running guns from America to the Haganah, which were the Zionist terrorists that were blowing up the British and everything.
So this guy was, he was...
Excellent. I accept all that.
Reinforcing the idea of Israel's role, but they were by no means alone.
Roger that, yes.
But Lyndon was a key player where the blood originated in Los Angeles in 1960 when he lost a nomination at JFK and forced himself on the table.
When Jack was taken out, he would ascend to the presidency.
Great. Well, what a rundown, Dr. Fetzer.
What a rundown.
And we barely scratched the surface.
Things are moving so quickly right now in national and international events.
But I think you gave us a very good update with things.
Anything you'd like to bring up, sir?
Well, John, I just appreciate having these shows with you.
I think you're doing a super job with this, and I'm much appreciative of being included.
Great, great.
Thank you for those kind words.
So to the audience, thank you for your attention.
Please do check out Dr. Fetzer's site in the bubble there and down in the description.
Patronize his books, buy his books, and then head over to Apocastastasis and enroll in some courses.
One final notice, next Friday, Dr. Fetzer and I are going to meet, but also in the evening, next Friday evening, Mr. Clinton Richardson is going to be presenting on foreign trade zones and the legal system and international law.
So if you're interested, we have a rundown about that on the site.
And most especially, Dr. Fetzer, again, thank you for dropping in here.
My pleasure, John.
▲
Export Selection