Truth Jihad Radio

Chicago-based writer AJ Smuskiewicz makes his debut on Truth Jihad Radio. The topic: His excellent new appreciation of RFK Jr. “Why I’m for Kennedy.” He notes that even if we give Trump the benefit of the doubt on good intentions, Kennedy is a far more serious threat to the powers-that-shouldn’t-be:

“Depth of understanding is important to have for a president, because that will provide the backbone he needs to prevent himself from getting rolled by the Deep State b******s. Trump lacks the depth and intellectualism of Kennedy. That’s why I have no confidence that he would be able to stand up to the neocon warmongers regarding Ukraine. After all, when he was president, he sent weapons to Ukraine at the urging of the warmongers around him. Trump’s good instincts were not and are not enough. He got rolled then and he would get rolled again. Kennedy’s depth of understanding would allow him to stand strong, fight back, and prevail against the warmongers.”

But does Kennedy have a chance to upset an unpopular Democratic president, like his father would have had he not been stopped by bullets?

“In all honesty, my gut tells me ‘no.’ There is no way that the thoroughly decadent America of 2023-24 will support an RFK today the way that many Americans supported an RFK in 1968…But I don’t care. I am supporting him anyway. My hope for RFK Jr is allowing me to cling onto some small remnant of hope for a nation that I had totally given up on—and for an environmental cause that I had abandoned.”

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com/subscribe

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Jafar Ramini, Palestinian writer and political analyst, joins us from Australia to discuss the recent 75th anniversary of the Nakba—the “Palestinian Holocaust”—which he experienced personally:

“Jafar was born in Jenin, Northern Palestine on May 21st, 1943. He was 5 years old when he and his family had to flee the terror of the Zionist militia. He lived i…

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Jafar Ramini, Palestinian writer and political analyst, joins us from Australia to discuss the recent 75th anniversary of the Nakba—the “Palestinian Holocaust”—which he experienced personally:

“Jafar was born in Jenin, Northern Palestine on May 21st, 1943. He was 5 years old when he and his family had to flee the terror of the Zionist militia. He lived i…

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Mathew Crawford of Rounding the Earth recently emailed me: “What are the chances that World War E is ‘globalists trying to pilot China’ vs. ‘other globalists trying to pilot America’, where the Rothschilds are the most likely source using China and perhaps Elon has taken control of American machinery by virtue of having the satellite system that breaks the symmetry. Thoughts?” My first thought was: “I’d better invite Mathew on the show to talk about this.”

Mathew Crawford is an “Educator, Entrepreneur, Statistician, Finance Specialist, and Founder of Rounding the Earth.”

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Video link

Donald Trump is, in many ways, an odious figure. A narcissistic semi-literate scoundrel who doesn’t even pretend otherwise, his primary redeeming qualities are a talent for channeling populist outrage and a certain reluctance to engage in bloody, pointless wars.

Normally I only vote for people I like (i.e. Cynthia McKinney and RFK Jr.) which is why I’ve never voted for a major-party candidate in a general election. I doubt very much that my first-ever vote for a mainstream candidate will be for the loathsome Trump. But the fake-left oligarchs and their lapdog media are working overtime to convince me to at least entertain the possibility.

The thing is, the media, legal, and political landscape has grown so grotesquely one-sided that Trump’s claims that the system is rigged against him, which once seemed whiny and petulant, are increasingly being validated. Big media’s Deep-State-assisted suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was, for many of us, the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Since that election-deciding outrage, it has been obvious and undeniable that just because Trump is paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get him.

And the outrages just keep coming. As J-Mike Springmann and I remarked on False Flag Weekly News, the week’s two big Trump events—his civil conviction for libel and sexual assault, and his CNN Town Hall battle with Kaitlan Collins—almost seemed to have been orchestrated to spotlight Trump’s unfair treatment at the hands of the Establishment.

Jimmy Dore makes a good case that Trump’s civil trial for sexual assault and defamation was “A Pure Democratic Hit Job.” Dore points out that New York’s bizarre one-year repeal of the statute of limitations was specifically designed to grease the skids for Carroll-v-Trump. Since when did governments start temporarily repealing statutes of limitations so they can go after political figures they don’t like? The move seems especially egregious because it involved an almost three-decade-old case in which the alleged victim can’t even remember which year the alleged assault happened, and has no evidence whatsoever other than her word against his. If you’re going to do something as extreme as suspending the statute of limitations so you can prosecute a specific case, shouldn’t you at least have some evidence?

My advice to the Democrats is that they might as well go all the way and prosecute Trump for murder. Why murder? For one thing, there is no statute of limitations on murder, so they won’t have to bother suspending it. And just as Trump once said a stupid thing about grabbing women’s genitals that made him sound like “the kind of person who might do something like that,” he also once said “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters.” So why not bring an evidence-free prosecution against him for shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue? Just find someone willing to claim they saw Trump shoot someone to death in the middle of Fifth Avenue in 1995, or was it 1996? It will be their word against his. And we all know Trump is a liar. Why? Because the media never stop telling us so. No New York jury could possibly fail to convict. And no New York judge could resist sentencing Donald J. Trump to death. (Yes, I know New York suspended the death penalty in 2004, but they could temporarily change that, just like they temporarily removed the statute of limitations, in order to dispose of Trump.)

Once Trump has been convicted and sentenced to death, we’ll all be able to breathe freely and get on with our lives, right? Not so fast! Trump’s lawyers will undoubtedly find a way to string out the appeals process, allowing him to become the first-ever candidate to run for president from death row. But what happens when he wins the election and his scheduled rendezvous with the electric chair happens to coincide with inauguration day? Will Trump be helicoptered to Washington, DC in handcuffs on January 20th, 2025, frog-marched into the Capitol, administered the oath of office, and then strapped into a special portable electric chair designed just for him and zapped like a bug? Will his hair turn an even brighter shade of orange as it bursts into flame? The Democrats would no doubt view it as inadequate payback for the horrors Trump unleashed there on January 6, 2021. But still…think of the ratings!

[For a serious analysis of MSM inadvertently (?) offering Trump favorable publicity, check out my Crescent International article “Ex-President’s Legal Woes: ‘Trumped-Up’ Charges, or Symptoms of US Decline?”]

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Video link

Donald Trump is, in many ways, an odious figure. A narcissistic semi-literate scoundrel who doesn’t even pretend otherwise, his primary redeeming qualities are a talent for channeling populist outrage and a certain reluctance to engage in bloody, pointless wars.

Normally I only vote for people I like (i.e. Cynthia McKinney and RFK Jr.) which is why I’ve never voted for a major-party candidate in a general election. I doubt very much that my first-ever vote for a mainstream candidate will be for the loathsome Trump. But the fake-left oligarchs and their lapdog media are working overtime to convince me to at least entertain the possibility.

The thing is, the media, legal, and political landscape has grown so grotesquely one-sided that Trump’s claims that the system is rigged against him, which once seemed whiny and petulant, are increasingly being validated. Big media’s Deep-State-assisted suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was, for many of us, the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Since that election-deciding outrage, it has been obvious and undeniable that just because Trump is paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get him.

And the outrages just keep coming. As J-Mike Springmann and I remarked on False Flag Weekly News, the week’s two big Trump events—his civil conviction for libel and sexual assault, and his CNN Town Hall battle with Kaitlan Collins—almost seemed to have been orchestrated to spotlight Trump’s unfair treatment at the hands of the Establishment.

Jimmy Dore makes a good case that Trump’s civil trial for sexual assault and defamation was “A Pure Democratic Hit Job.” Dore points out that New York’s bizarre one-year repeal of the statute of limitations was specifically designed to grease the skids for Carroll-v-Trump. Since when did governments start temporarily repealing statutes of limitations so they can go after political figures they don’t like? The move seems especially egregious because it involved an almost three-decade-old case in which the alleged victim can’t even remember which year the alleged assault happened, and has no evidence whatsoever other than her word against his. If you’re going to do something as extreme as suspending the statute of limitations so you can prosecute a specific case, shouldn’t you at least have some evidence?

My advice to the Democrats is that they might as well go all the way and prosecute Trump for murder. Why murder? For one thing, there is no statute of limitations on murder, so they won’t have to bother suspending it. And just as Trump once said a stupid thing about grabbing women’s genitals that made him sound like “the kind of person who might do something like that,” he also once said “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters.” So why not bring an evidence-free prosecution against him for shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue? Just find someone willing to claim they saw Trump shoot someone to death in the middle of Fifth Avenue in 1995, or was it 1996? It will be their word against his. And we all know Trump is a liar. Why? Because the media never stop telling us so. No New York jury could possibly fail to convict. And no New York judge could resist sentencing Donald J. Trump to death. (Yes, I know New York suspended the death penalty in 2004, but they could temporarily change that, just like they temporarily removed the statute of limitations, in order to dispose of Trump.)

Once Trump has been convicted and sentenced to death, we’ll all be able to breathe freely and get on with our lives, right? Not so fast! Trump’s lawyers will undoubtedly find a way to string out the appeals process, allowing him to become the first-ever candidate to run for president from death row. But what happens when he wins the election and his scheduled rendezvous with the electric chair happens to coincide with inauguration day? Will Trump be helicoptered to Washington, DC in handcuffs on January 20th, 2025, frog-marched into the Capitol, administered the oath of office, and then strapped into a special portable electric chair designed just for him and zapped like a bug? Will his hair turn an even brighter shade of orange as it bursts into flame? The Democrats would no doubt view it as inadequate payback for the horrors Trump unleashed there on January 6, 2021. But still…think of the ratings!

[For a serious analysis of MSM inadvertently (?) offering Trump favorable publicity, check out my Crescent International article “Ex-President’s Legal Woes: ‘Trumped-Up’ Charges, or Symptoms of US Decline?”]

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com/subscribe

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Australian professor Binoy Kampmark got my attention last week with with his excellent Counterpunch article on Assange’s foiled escape. In a bizarre twist, a CIA-linked bad guy with the same name as one of the JFK assassins, David Morales, was responsible for bugging the Ecuadorian embassy and foiling Assange’s getaway. It seems the Ecuadorian governmen…

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Australian professor Binoy Kampmark got my attention last week with with his excellent Counterpunch article on Assange’s foiled escape. In a bizarre twist, a CIA-linked bad guy with the same name as one of the JFK assassins, David Morales, was responsible for bugging the Ecuadorian embassy and foiling Assange’s getaway. It seems the Ecuadorian governmen…

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Scientist and renaissance man Josh Mitteldorf discusses science (“Can the future reach into the past to call itself into existence?“) and politics (“Windfall for an Election Software Company — and a muzzle for anyone who questions Election Integrity“). “My thesis is that while all of today’s science is rooted in the paradigm that influence flows only fr…

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Scientist and renaissance man Josh Mitteldorf discusses science (“Can the future reach into the past to call itself into existence?“) and politics (“Windfall for an Election Software Company — and a muzzle for anyone who questions Election Integrity“). “My thesis is that while all of today’s science is rooted in the paradigm that influence flows only fr…

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com