NOW IN 22 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. CLICK ON THE LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER “TRANSLATE” TAB TO FIND YOURS!

By Jeff J. Brown

Pictured above: Brett Redmayne-Titley and his website, Watching Rome Burn.

Do your friends, family and colleagues a favor to make sure they are Sino-smart: 
Journalism: https://chinarising.puntopress.com/blog-2/
Books: https://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/06/18/praise-for-the-china-trilogy-the-votes-are-in-it-r-o-c-k-s-what-are-you-waiting-for/
Website: https://www.chinarising.puntopress.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/44_Days
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/44DaysPublishing
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeff-j-brown-0517477/
WeChat/WhatsApp: +8613823544196
VK: https://vk.com/chinarisingradiosinoland
Bitchute videos: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/REzt6xmcmCX1/
Brighteon videos: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/jeffjbrown
SoundCloud podcasts: https://soundcloud.com/44-days/
iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/cn/podcast/china-rising/id1475341060?l=en
Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/user/jjbzaibeijing
Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/blog/jjbzaibeijing
About me: https://chinarising.puntopress.com/about-the-author/

Sixteen years on the streets, living and working with the people of China, Jeff

Original audio-visual interview and introduction,

Brett Redmayne-Titley, world traveling journalist talks about Trump, Biden, color revolutions and US imperialism’s big global footprint. China Rising Radio Sinoland 201113

Transcript

Jeff Brown – Good afternoon, everybody. This is Jeff J. Brown China Rising Radio Sinoland on the north coast of France in Normandy, and I am going to go across the Atlantic Ocean into the Caribbean to a little-known island called Curaçao.

And I have on the show today an amazing journalist, Mr. Brett Redmayne-Titley. How are you doing, Brett?

Brett Redmayne-Titley – I’m doing a great, Jeff. Thanks for having me on your show.

Jeff – Hey, listen, just a little bit of introduction. Brett and I talked a couple of days ago by video, and it just wasn’t quite there. And so we talked for almost an hour and got to know each other and decided to do this interview but it’s the with my ADSL, my third world, 1980s phone technology here in France where I live, we decided to go audio. So no video today. But you have a nice voice. You really should do more radio journalism.

Brett – Probably be more money in it.

Jeff – Let me tell you a little bit about Brett and how we met. He spent his formative years in Australia, Ghana, and the Bahamas before turning 14 years old. He has since experienced fifty-six countries since turning his attention to world politics 12 years ago. He has authored more than one hundred and ninety in-depth articles for many of the best alternative news services, many of which have been republished and translated for international publication.

On scene, reporting has been his passion, and his reporting has included live reports from such events as the Keystone XL pipeline, the twenty twelve DNC convention, Hezbollah and the twenty eighteen Lebanon election, the twenty sixteen Trump campaign, and many more Brett work is regularly featured at the UN’s Review and for research on globalization and archive of his articles can be found at his website watching Rome Burn.

And it’s just exactly as you read it, Watching Rome burn, www.watchingromeburn.uk and I love his logo. It says Watching Rome Burn, then Video Sed Non Credo. And if I remember my high school Latin, that means, Seeing Is Not Believing. Right, Brett?

Brett – That’s very close. It means, I See But I Don’t Believe It.

Jeff – OK. See it, But… I got it. Listen, I don’t know where I saw him, but I’m just so happy to have Brett on the phone.

He’s got a tremendous body of work out there. And I don’t I can’t remember where it was, if it was The Greenville Post that posted you. But somebody you know, I’m a journalist and so people are constantly passing me stuff. And yours popped up. And I read your article about the color revolution in the United States with the presidential elections. And it was so good. And I mean, I was like, yeah, this is excellent.

And I got to contact this guy. I’d love to have him on my show. And that’s how it happens. So, Brett, please tell us a little bit about yourself, about your growing up and your arc of awareness about empire. I assume like me, you probably grew up. Maybe or maybe not. You probably grew up brainwashed like me. And then you peel the onion over the years. But how did you get to the point where you said seeing is not believing?

Brett – My first memory of my experience is that drew me into politics of political awareness was the Gough Whitlam disaster in Australia in approximately 1972 going from memory here in the Pine Gap issue, Pine Gap was an American backed intelligence facility in the middle of the Australian desert. And because Gough Whitlam was a nationalist, he wanted to stop that effort.

It was primarily from the Americans and they overthrew the government. That’s something that was not revealed until much later, you may recall the movie The Falcon and the Snowman, the book goes into that and some great detail. So it’s now established history that the Australians were at the behest of the Americans. Gough Whitlam was taken out as a prime minister of Australia under very suspicious circumstances. I was only about 11 years old.

That started a very strong inspiration for me, especially in place of my travels where I started seeing more and more of the American empire putting its fingers into the political situations in many countries. And of course, this, like I said, is in the late 60s, early 70s, I think for most observers and your listeners and viewers, they’re well aware that there only continued to become more American influence around the world, as we see today. You know, we’re still seeking that influence in the American election.

But, you know, before that, we’ve had Venezuela just this past year. We’ve also had Bolivia. And my article about the color revolution is basically to suggest very strongly that color revolutions have now come to American shores.

Jeff – Yeah, it’s amazing. I think it was I can’t remember if it was his letters or his diary. I can’t remember. But George Orwell, who has quite controversial, whether you’re on the left or the right. But he commented.

I think it was maybe his first novel, Burmese Days, where he said that empire always has to maintain control of the national population, the brutality and the violence of empire, colonialism and empire must be imported back into the home country to maintain control. Is that what you’re seeing in the United States?

Brett – Yes, that’s what I was suggesting in my article, that you’re referencing. It was very cursory in terms of my analysis of color revolutions because I intend to go more into that in greater detail in subsequent articles. But I think it was important that the American reader realized, as you suggested, Jeff that it has indeed come to American shores.

And if you look at the use of color revolutions around the world, they have all started with an election, a national election being contested on a razor-thin margin and then one side contesting it and then there being intervention by the national government. And of course, that’s a very long list that I need not go into. I guess, again, Venezuela is an example of Bolivia being the most recent one.

So, yes, I think that it has come to American shores and Americans need to be very cognizant of this, because if it’s not exposed for what it is, America likely will suffer nearly the same consequences as we’ve seen again and again in other countries.

Jeff – Yeah, if and if we broaden that definition a little, you can look at Belarus today, with all of the election being contested there. And then I go back to 1989 with the Tiananmen Square protests, where at least that was the model that Gene Sharp used from, he was a CIA cover behind the scenes hiding behind the Einstein Institute. But that whole, that whole book about civil disobedience and protesting elections.

And he had that whole playbook that he developed to overthrow countries that were and are not obedient vassals to Western Empire. And it’s been incredibly successful as you go back through the decades. I mean, isn’t it amazing?

Brett – Well, yes, it is, but I think there’s been a bit of a shift in the American focus before the color revolutions being sort of denoted as such that’s a modern term that’s now used initially especially in Latin America, South America. America was very anti-communist and by extension, anti-socialist. And I would suggest that socialism and communism were mutually exclusive.

Today really what you’re seeing is that America just doesn’t like any resistance against its hegemony in those foreign countries. As long as they have the political powers at bay, they’re happy to let society continue.

But those powers generally are very mercenary, very capitalistic, and very predatory upon their own countries, which is fine for America. But what America sells is the ability for those dictators or elected officials who act as dictators to continue to operate as such, you know, under American approval, when those political leaders run afoul of America by not kowtowing to the American foreign interests, that’s when America routinely steps in.

And I think that’s when the definition of color revolution has been brought to bear as not being necessarily anti-communist, not necessarily anti-socialist, but just purely anti-American.

Jeff – Yeah, yeah. I read somewhere back. I can’t remember where it was. Of course, there was General Smedley Butler back in the 30s who exposed the fascist plot to overthrow Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal. But somewhere and all that researching, I remember reading that he, and one of his famous comments was, “You know, I was a muscle man for the United Fruit Company and Dole Pineapple and all that in Latin America. And he was a US Marine general.

I also read that from 1920, something like the United States intervened militarily in Latin America 6,000 times. I mean it may have just been a boat, it may have just been a platoon of Marines or they may have occupied a small area or they may have overtaken an entire country or whatever, but that’s six thousand times in the last hundred years. That said, does that sound like something you’ve researched?

Brett – Well, I’m familiar with Smedley Butler and what he had to say, and I do agree with it. Yeah, I think he was pointing out the greater picture is that American foreign policy started at that time, started becoming beholden to corporate interests more than national interests.

And of course, that’s certainly true today. The other point that I think in keeping with the Smedley Butler example is that revisionist history in America has been very good at this, has hidden people like Smedley Butler and what he’s had to say from popular discourse or modern discourse. And this is very true of several different subjects, revisionist history.

And he pointed out Orwell. He spoke about this as well. But the revisionist history is hiding America’s foibles from the, you know, the modern discourse. And in alluding to the color revolutions, Smedley Butler, other things of that nature. And of course, that’s a very lengthy list. A lot of that is eliminated from the discourse. And I would suggest that the media plays a dramatic role in that. And that role is also to propagate that mythology that America is somehow sacrosanct from the discussion.

Jeff – When do you think in US history I mean, we could go back to the fifteen hundreds with colonialism, but European colonialism, but just specifically with the US. When do you think that this kind of this transition from national interests in terms of geopolitics, which, you know, started with the Monroe Doctrine, but when did it quit being so nationalist?

Where it became more and more corporate or private? The big corporations, when did they start having such a huge effect on US foreign policy?

Brett – Well, that’s a good question, Jeff, and of course, that’s a very long answer that could go back to things like Bretton Woods, etc. For me, I think the short answer is the collapse of the Soviet Union when America no longer had the sole focus of anticommunism because the Soviet Union had functionally collapsed.

I think some of us would argue that the Soviet Union collapsed, reasons of which you’re seeing America starting to be a good society being degraded, which is the priority of the militarism at all costs, as opposed to the propagation of its society.

So, yes, for me, using just one example, I think that 1989 of the fall of the wall is really what started the whole chain reaction of corporate interests now looking at a globalist interest and also enticing the foreign nationalist national corporations as becoming part and parcel of the American corporate interests as well.

Jeff – In your youth? Well, first off, I had to get a map. I mean, I kind of sort of knew Curaçao was in the Caribbean, but, and I know there’s a drink called Curaçao. But just tell us where you are in the Caribbean and a little bit about Curaçao. And then I’d like to ask you a follow on question.

Brett – Sure, well, Curaçao is right off the Venezuelan coast, so close that you can see Venezuela from the island here on a very clear day. It’s approximately 40 miles away.

So when you see it, you don’t see the coast, which what you see is it rises to the mountains right off of the coast, as many countries do. So you’re seeing the mountains just beyond the coast of Venezuela as such, especially in terms of the very poor economy in Venezuela. A lot of that, I would say, is the result directly of American intervention.

There’s a very strong Venezuelan population here. Interestingly, there are about five different languages that are spoken here. Know Dutch being the predominant one because the Dutch were the ones who settled what is the, you know, the Caribbean Antilles back in the slave trade era.

So Dutch remained a strong language. You have Papiamentu, which is the island dialect, which is a combination of French, Dutch, Spanish, etc. And then, of course, you do have Spanish and that comes from the Venezuelan influence or influx because many people have taken the time to come over for their economic interests to Curaçao, where opportunity is indeed better, although this is still an uncertain shade and impoverished country and it’s trying very hard to move into the capitalist methods of things.

But that capitalism has left a big portion of their population behind. So you do have dramatic poverty here as well. I would suggest that one of the problems in talking previously about American influence, American influence is extremely strong in the Netherlands. You can see this from the records, you know, the MH17 reports, you know, these kinds of things where, you know, Holland has not been objective in that.

But some of the influence here in Curaçao, I think trickles through the Americans, through the Dutch in Amsterdam, or what have you. You know, the leadership of the Netherlands right here to Curaçao.

One important thing that took place recently was that the Americans did very strongly try to place 5,000 troops here on the island in the preparation, presumably for some kind of action against Venezuela. And the Curaçao government refused to do that.

Jeff – Oh, my God, when did that happen? Brett.

Brett – Ah, that’s their last six months.

Jeff – Oh, my gosh. Five thousand troops. That’s unbelievable. Well, tell us about that. I never heard that scoop.

Brett – Well, in fairness, I hadn’t heard about it either. And I’m kind of a news junkie just like yourself. I heard about this from the local people that I’ve met here. I’ve been here basically two months now. I’ll be here for another month. You know, the short story is that I’ve come here to get away from the virus issues, which is a whole other subject in and of itself. But society here is predominantly normal in terms of the virus.

There is masks, you know, but they’re not required. You know the lockdowns have been discontinued. So it’s so curious how it is going in the right direction. But in meeting people here, that was one of the things that they told me, is that it was quite the storm of controversy. As an example, the popular president is currently in jail, a little bit like Lula was in jail in Brazil. You know, he was charged with different crimes and was put away right before the last national election.

The current president is much more beholden to the Dutch government and is not that as popular with the people in Curaçao. I’m told that in the lead up to the election and the election was within the last year, there were huge protests against the current president. And the president, so I’m told, has become a little bit fearful of his people on some of his political and international foreign policy decisions. And that’s what, you know, sort of forced the issue on him, not allowing the 5000 troops to come to Curaçao.

The population was vehemently against it, of course. And keep in mind that there is a very strong Venezuelan population here. Most of them are illegal, but that doesn’t mean that they’re not vociferous in their opposition.

Jeff – Yes, that’s incredible. Oh, that’s amazing. Yeah. Even TeleSUR, I never heard of that in TeleSUR, which is the Venezuelan,  ALBA, you know, the socialist group of countries has their television website and I refer to it every day. TeleSUR and they never mentioned it. That’s amazing. So the president got thrown in jail. Sounds like the good old, you know, frame up to get rid of someone who’s not in your back, you know, who’s not in the West’s back pocket. It does sound like he was framed up to get rid of him.

Brett – That’s what I’ve been told. I’ve got to be honest and say that because I’m new to Curaçao, so I don’t know all the subtleties, but I’m involved in the water polo community here. Being a former water polo official, people know that I’m a journalist and they have shared their sort of personal opinions and their personal opinions are that, yes, it was a degree I wouldn’t say frame-up, but shall we say exaggerated charges being used for political gain.

And apparently, he was, slaying in their minds was more popular than the current president. And of course, that’s indicated by the very strong protests that took place. Tires were being burned in the streets, huge gatherings right after the most recent election. So I think that speaks to a degree of dissatisfaction by the public about the current president. Interestingly as well, there’s been an influx in Dutch military presence here, not dramatically, mostly in intelligence,  associates of mine, from water polo, interestingly enough, are in intelligence for the Dutch government.

Of course, they’re very mum about what their role is, as they should be, I would argue. But I think it’s well, they’re happy to admit that they’ve been recently brought here to increase, if you will, an intelligence effort here on the island.

And I think that’s a substitute for the five thousand troops, in a sense, you know, monitoring in Venezuela. They say they’re not necessarily following Venezuela, but I’ll leave others to read between the lines on that.

Jeff – Amazing, well, by the way just for fans out there who didn’t catch it when he was, Brett mentioned, MH17, that Holland, the Netherlands, you may notice as the Netherlands or Holland is as very much under American imperial influence.

MH17 was the Malaysian Airline jet that crashed over Ukraine. And as far as I’m concerned, the whole investigation has been had just been a complete and total farce. And then the other one that he mentioned was OPCW which is the Organization for Chemical…

Brett – OPCW Organization for Prevention of Chemical Weapons.

Jeff – The chemical weapons, and they’ve had some very, I think, bogus reports, you know, about supposedly, you know, the Syrian government killing its people. And it all seems to be falling apart now with the whistleblowers coming out and saying it was a bad report. So I just wanted to mention MH17 and OPCW, because he mentioned them during his talks.

So what do you, what’s exciting you, like right now? Like you’re writing. I know I saw that excellent article you wrote about the elections in the US and the fact that it seems like a color revolution. What’s with the election being stolen by the Democrats from Trump? What else what are you writing about now? And what’s got you excited as far as journalism, geopolitics, etc.?

Brett – Well, right now it is the American election, Jeff. I think there’s no bigger story in the world right now unless you’re a Democrat. All right. Well.

Jeff – Let’s talk about that. What do you think is going to happen?

I was very disappointed, although, China finally came out and recognized and accepted Biden’s victory, according to the Associated Press and the mainstream media.

What do you think? I agree, too. I’m tired. My head is spinning from all of the news. And I’ve got something going. I’ll have to talk to you. I’m getting three other writers, Ramin Mazaheri, Amir Khan and TP Wilkinson are going to do or I’m hoping we’ll do podcast readings of their articles about the elections.

And if you want to publish your article on China Rising and do a podcast reading it, I’d be happy to include yours to consider your article, which was outstanding. So what’s going to happen? I mean, just, and I agree, it’s almost addictive. It’s hard to not keep thinking about it. Tell us what you think is going on and how it’s going to end up.

Brett – Well, I wrote an article and at the risk of tooting my own horn, what the article was about was the use of the Electoral College.

Most people are very unfamiliar with the Electoral College because it’s very rarely come into play in a U.S. election. Of course, most people do know about 2000 where it came into play to a degree, but it’s never been used to overturn an election necessarily. The machinations of it were crafted by the Founding Fathers as a method to, if you will, what’s the right word to use here?

Do not necessarily go to mob rule because they were cognizant of the fact that current events could create a situation where… and dissuade the impetus of the sheep moving in one direction.

What was interesting about the article is it’s picked up a great degree of traction, not only my article but the argument that I presented that the Electoral College could be used by the various states to decide that they no longer want Biden to be the anointed president per se. I think that’s the bigger issue right now. The article you referred to was really about what’s taken place just in the last week since the election.

This article was written before the election at the time when Biden was being assailed for his alleged criminality or at least duplicity of loyalty and his known pay to play scheme with his son, Hunter. John Hunter just had the article that shows that those allegations were at least worthy of investigation. But beyond investigation, which could happen at the congressional level and the senatorial level, it seemed to me that can be used also within the Electoral College should a state…

And we’re seeing this now as you’re seeing states such as Georgia that are becoming very outraged about the fact that their election has been manipulated in favor of the Democratic candidate was in Georgia as an example. It was to say, and we’ll leave the speculation out about the corruption and things like that. That’s another matter, you know, the recounts that are going to take place, etc.

But if Georgia remained for Biden, but their House of Representatives, they no longer want to have Biden as the anointed candidate because of the fraudulent nature of the election. It is very much within their power that their state legislature will indeed decide just to cast their electoral votes for Trump. And if you look, there’s also imagination.

Jeff – It’s Republican-controlled.

Brett – Well, actually, Georgia is not that much Republican-controlled. I think their governor is a Republican in name only.

Jeff – But as you look around, the House is as I recall, I think Georgia’s legislature is pretty solidly Republican. So they can send 16 votes. Go ahead.

Brett – That’s true, yes, but I think the bigger point is one of the objections, and this is a point about the Electoral College that very few people understand.

Firstly, the election has to be certified by the Electoral College in each state that takes place by definition on December 14th. And that’s open to public view, which is interesting because the public is waking up very quickly to the fact that this election has not been necessarily carried out legitimately. So I’m not data, December 14th. It is possible that public opinion can be brought to bear upon the electors and therefore they could change their mind, OK?

The electors are individuals. They’re generally appointed as just quid pro quo for political party patronage. And in the past, that hasn’t mattered. There has been a move in recent years to make it so that the electoral cannot jump, ship has to vote the party line. However, they’re not obligated to do so. And no state has a criminal penalty for it. There are things like just reneging on their vote, changing their vote back to where the political party feels it should be.

What also is very interesting is that it then has to go and be certified in the US House of Representatives, and that takes place on January 6th. Once again, the dates are all fixed, you know, on the calendar by constitutional decree on January 6th.

It is within the Constitution that any state can object to the choice of the candidate using just a state that you like. But if one state decides to object and they have to object on constitutional grounds, well, certainly constitutional grounds would be a fraudulent election or fraudulently of an election. If they object on constitutional grounds. You have to, by constitutional law, have a separate joint hearing of both houses of Congress to address the constitutional issue.

And that’s if one state does it, everything comes to a grinding halt and you can’t certify an election until all 50 states have had their chance to declare their ballots or their electoral college is being certified. So if one state doesn’t or two states or three states or what have you, then there will be a very large international news story about American politics coming to a screaming halt.

Jeff – How does that work then, if the Republicans gain, I think, 15 seats in the House of Representatives and now it’s like 212 or something.

But I know the Republicans gained like 15 seats in the US House of Representatives and depending on the recount in Georgia, would have a slim majority in the Senate. How would that voting work if it went to both houses of Congress?

Is it 50-50, one more vote than the total number, or is it two-thirds majority or how does that work?

Brett – Well, that’s a very good question, Jeff, because it’s something that historically has never been answered.

Jeff – Unbelievable.

Brett – No, it’s a very interesting question because, under review, which as you mentioned, I’m one of Ron Unz’s stable of writers, when the article came out, the comment section tends to be a lot more academic, you know, comment sections and some of the publications, it’s nothing but stone-throwing and, you know, ad hominem attacks, certainly to a degree, the case with Unz.

But the people who take the time to read Unz for the academic presentations, which I tried myself to craft, I got involved in that. Some have dismissed the whole argument out of hand, but some people got very much involved in what I was trying to suggest.

And looking at the answer, it appears that the answer is, if it was to go to a joint, to a vote and that vote would be in the House when that vote takes place, it would not be by the representatives of the elected representatives, the electric congressmen, congresswomen.

The vote would mean per state college. So that’s why the machinations of the Electoral College would be very important per state, because if one state decides to eject and that’s a different series of proceedings.

But if it did go to a vote,  you know, a Kamala or a Biden would not be the president. Kamala Harris would not be the president. Well, you would have, would be a vote. And that vote would not be by the Congresspersons themselves.

It would be by the state. And this is why I believe and thanks to the excellent comments that were given to the Unz piece, I believe that is the answer. And, of course, with the substance of the Biden allegations regarding pay to play while he was vice president, applied to the very fragile nature of this particular election. I think that the reader can see that there’s a very strong likelihood that this election may go a different way.

Jeff – So are you saying then that the vote would be 50 votes?

Brett – Yes, 50 votes.

Jeff – Well, then, in that case, there are more red states and blue states.

Brett – Exactly and that was a point that was made to me by one of the people in the comments section who weighed in very nicely and very academically in digesting what I had previously suggested, because to be honest, I didn’t know the answer. And as the other very good commentors digested my presentation, I feel that they hit the nail on the head.

Well, send me the link to your work about the Electoral College, and I’ll add that to the blog page on China Rising Radio Sinoland. So how do you, I mean, Paul Craig Roberts is just coming out with lists of fraudulent stuff?

And I mean, I have pages of evidence and then the one where the guy who is the postal worker who said that he exposed corruption. And then The Washington Post came out and said he recanted and then he came out and said, no, I didn’t recant. I mean, it’s just like the worst propaganda on the side of, the Biden side and the BBC.

And, you know, The New York Times and The Washington Post and all of the major television stations, even including Fox, except for Tucker Carlson, who they can’t seem to shut up. But what do you see?

How do you see all this? Do you think that Trump will have the money and the resources to get this corruption brought to the forefront so that they will be forced to do a recount? Or do you think he’s just going to stall and go with the Electoral College as you talked about?

Brett – No, I think it’s a two-pronged attack that both sides can’t be discounted, in deference to PCR. Paul Craig Roberts, who’s one of my colleagues at Unz and quite frankly, I have to thank him.

He was very instrumental in bringing my piece to bear with some of his readers, as well as some of the allegations which are somewhat picayune. They’re not going, you know, as much as they might be 100 percent true in the grand scheme, of turning this election around. And please, I would like the listeners to understand I am not a Trump fan. I am not a Biden fan. I am, you know, bipartisan in my critiques of political elements in America completely and always.

However, the smaller issues are not likely to come to bear in any substantive manner that would overturn the election. The legal elements will certainly do that in a piece that I’m preparing right now. The difference in the votes and I’m going from memory here of Wisconsin, Georgia, oh let’s see there was a total of four, but if you will, it was 86,000.

Jeff – Pennsylvania.

Brett – Pennsylvania. Yeah, but if you put it together, it was only 86,000 votes. Is it possible that Trump can garner 86,000 votes through a technicality and legal maneuvers? Yes, I think that is indeed possible. If you look at Wisconsin and what took place on that night alone, that could easily go beyond the 20,000 vote difference that it has today.

If you look at what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did in basically circumventing its legislature by allowing for votes to be counted after the due date for the votes, you must read Samuel Alito’s dissent when he crafted an opinion forcing an emergency order to bear. It was some very strong language. And that’s very unusual for Supreme Court justices.

Usually, most of them are metered in their presentation, even if they’re not particularly pleased with what it is they’re overturning. So this dissent, some strong indications that the Supreme Court is willing to entertain other arguments regarding voter fraud. And we’ll see where that comes into play. But I think that’s somewhat mutually exclusive to the argument about the Electoral College. Certainly, as I said, within the machinations of the courts.

Yes. And Trump has the possibility of overturning the election, but also in the Electoral College, Trump has that separate possibility of doing the same.

Jeff – That’s amazing. Well, I know that the US attorney general, William Barr, for the first time in US history, allowed the Office of Election Fraud in the Department of Justice to do their investigation before the inauguration.

It’s always been done after, like in February, March, to address any claims when it was ex post facto across the Rubicon can’t go back and change, but he has now allowed federal prosecutors to start their investigation of the because it says, he said, substantial evidence of fraud, etc. So do you think that the DOJ, the Department of Justice, having the opportunity to do their due diligence before June, January 20^th, or 21^st of the inauguration, do you think might have an impact?

Brett – Well, if William Barr is sincere, but, you know, if you look at Barr, he’s had every opportunity to go after the power players in the DNC that have been after Trump with the Russia investigation, which was fraudulent. Let’s be honest about this. Once again, I am not a Trump fan, but that was just absolute hyperbole at the very least. Then you have the impeachment attempt, which even if you looked at the impeachment attempt by the Democrats, it was a very tepid attempt at impeachment.

There were certainly other things that could have been brought to bear against Trump if they were sincere. I wrote a lengthy piece on that as well. I would encourage maybe the listeners to, you know, to find that piece in my archives. But Barr is an interesting case study for that reason that he’s been suspiciously very reluctant to take very substantial allegations and other matters and bring them to bear with DOJ.

So suddenly through the impetus of this election, he’s now willing to do this at the 11th hour. I would argue that Trump is now starting to act like the president that he promised to be four years ago, only by necessity.

You look at his foreign policy decisions as far as bringing the troops home now getting rid of Esper if you see I think his name is McDonald or McDouglas, the retired military colonel who’s now taking over as acting defense secretary. You know, there’s a wholesale change in Trump’s demeanor as far as being the populist or the nationalist that he said he was going to be. And I, as I just said, I think that’s only by political necessity, if not survival, that he’s trying to do this now.

But in making those mistakes, he’s surrounded himself with people that have been very duplicitous in their allegiance to their president. And I think you could make that claim about a Barr.

Jeff – Yeah, OK, we’ll see what happens. Well, I can’t stop, I keep watching it. It’s just so unbelievable.

I’m not a, well I’m a registered Democrat in Oklahoma, but it’s just so I can vote in the primaries because if you’re not a registered voter, you don’t get to vote in the primaries. And there’s a lot of things I like about Trump. A lot of things I dislike about Trump.

I think he’s doing it unintentionally. He’s doing a wonderful job of bringing down Western empire, whether he realizes that or not. So I rather like the fact that he’s such, he’s got the deep state, sort of maybe not on their heels, but at least keeping them second guessing.

Brett – Well, the secondary viewpoint on this, I would argue, Jeff, is that the DNC has shot themselves in the foot with the voter but have no platform other than anti-Trump. They’ve not offered anything but a very loose set of assurances based on the Green New Deal or what have you or placating Black Lives Matter, you know, to entice the voter to vote for Biden. Biden’s a very flawed human being.

The media plays into this dramatically because Biden’s forty or forty-five years in politics have been covered up, and on his track record. Your voting record indicates what the man is all about. You know, the example of the three-strikes laws, minimum sentencing laws that were brought to bear by Biden himself. You know, how can an African-American voter in good faith vote for Biden if they would know that?

But by extension, I think what’s happened here is that Pelosi, by willing to use the pandemic to hurt the economy, by using Black Lives Matter and Antifa to create havoc in the streets and to condone these things, publicly condone them and get the Democratic governor base to do the same thing, has alienated a huge portion of the American Democratic constituency from their party. And you’re already seeing this now that Pelosi is now, or I’m sorry, Pelosi is now trying to maintain power again as a speaker.

And she almost went out on her ear two years ago for some of the same reasons, because you had an influx of sincere Democratic candidates brought to bear in the House now the House is well, it was predicted that they were going to gain seats in the House. They certainly did not. They lost 12 seats. So this has been a debacle or whatever the number is. But they certainly lost. They didn’t gain the Senate, it looks, because the senator from Arkansas, from excuse me, from Alaska, he prevailed.

So now the Republicans do, as I think yesterday, have 50 seats no matter what it looks like they should at least get one in Georgia. Probably, two. And so there goes Pelosi’s entire game plan completely right out the window. And on top of that, she’s managed to alienate not only the voter but also a huge part in a portion of her own political, you know, political caucus.

You know, from her viewpoint, she needs to be thrown out. She does. And because she’s not serving the interests of the American public and certainly not serving the interests of the Democratic voter, is she serving the interests of the DNC? Oh, absolutely. And there lies the problem.

The DNC needs to become under, come under great scrutiny by the Democratic voter to realize what these people have been up to, not only this year but four years ago with the Clinton debacle, whereby if you refer to the WikiLeaks revelations of just days before the election, it proved that the DNC was not following the will of the American people and that’s probably the kindest way you could put it.

Jeff – Yeah, well, that’s another thing I appreciate about Trump is that he is just ripped the mask off of the Democratic Party and Democrats in the United States in general, and it has just been, the D-wing for the global capitalist transnational party with the R-wing, I mean, they’re hiding behind FDR, the New Deal and hiding behind LBJ’s Great Society. But they, since 1980, I mean they have just become as neoliberal and just as neocon as the rest of the world, as the rest of the leadership in the United States.

And so I do want to thank Trump for just completely exposing them for who they are these days. What do you think?

Brett – I think what you’re saying is true, but the biggest problem and I think this is maybe the bigger point that’s been made in this particular election is that the media has now been exposed collectively. And that includes Fox News, who has previously been dramatically for Trump is exposed to the media. And that’s not just mainstream media. This is alternative media. A world that I’ve existed in now for 12 years.

I can categorically state that alternative media predominantly is just as bad as mainstream media. But the public has woken up to this. And that’s why at the risk of plugging Unz Review or possibly Global Research, they’ve taken a different viewpoint on this and have tried to be more metered in their approach, if not bipartisan in their approach. And I think that’s one of the reasons those particular news services continue to grow.

The public is very anxious for good quality news. I mean, we need a return to Walter Cronkite, for God’s sake, so this has become the bigger issue. And aside from whatever takes place, even if Biden does prevail, there’s a huge portion of America that is no longer going to be interested in their standard news service.

They’re going to start gravitating to better news services. And I think that’s very important because as Nelson Mandela once said, education is the most powerful tool that you can use to change the world. And speaking just for myself, I completely agree with that statement.

Jeff – Well, for years I’ve been calling it the Big Lie propaganda machine, the BLPM, and, yeah, that’s also been exposed.

I mean, the whole thing, the problem is that the media, at least in the West, not  in non-socialist communist countries, it is pretty much owned by the 8 to 9, or 8 to 10 transnational corporations. They’re embedded with the CIA and MI6 and NATO. And what’s so frightening now is that they’re censoring, they are censoring, you know, hundreds of thousands of social media accounts or shutting down channels. They’re blocking people.

Google is playing with their algorithms to shut people out. So that’s what’s worrisome is that the people may try to gravitate towards the alternative media. I know they already shut down Ron on his Facebook account, didn’t they?

And Facebook and maybe Twitter. I can’t remember how he lost one of his big accounts, social media accounts.

Brett – It was Facebook.

Jeff – Yeah and I’m just worried that the whole thing’s just going to slide into dystopian totalitarianism. It’s kind of spooky, to be honest.

Brett – Well, this is as I suggested when we briefly spoke the other day, if the reader/viewer wants to digest what’s taken place, this is what you just said has been admitted to the recent book that came out in July called Covid-19: The Great Reset was written by Klaus Schwab, who is the founder and current director of the World Economic Forum. And for those who are just tuning in to this, these are the biggest of the big power players in the world.

These are the kingmakers. You know, these are the people that control the media. These are the people that control politicians. These are the people that control militaries and they like to have things their way. And what’s peculiar about the book is that even if you just read the preface, it’s an absolute admission that they are going to use Covid-19 to affect their agenda.

Now, whether they’re successful or not is another matter. But have they admitted that there is an attempt to affect that agenda? Yes, indeed they have. And I would encourage anyone interested to see if they can find a copy of it online because it now has been removed. After all, it created quite a degree of controversy when it came out in July. In fairness, it’s a very, very well produced book. It’s very slick. It’s well-edited.

It’s an academic work. But do I agree with it? No. And I think that anyone interested in personal free will and free choice should be horrified that these same power players, you know, these kingmakers are all in the league trying to affect this stated agenda.

Jeff – Well, listen, Brett, this has been wonderful. I wish we could talk for five hours, but if it goes over an hour, the listenership starts to go down, and because people when they see a podcast, they check how long it is first. And we’ve had a wonderful discussion. And we can always get back together again and again and do another one.

But I do want to try to keep from going over one hour just to make sure that more people will click on it and listen to it. Thanks so much for being on this show on China Rising Radio Sinoland. And I want to, please tell the friends, fans, and followers out there your website again and how they can read all your stuff.

Brett – Oh, well, thank you, Jeff. Yes. I just want to say that I’m not a blogger. I’m a writer. I’m a journalist. My website is www.watchingromeburn.uk. It’s just an archive of all my work over the last 12 years. And I would encourage the readers to go and see it. I’m proud of my work. I like to think that I do good work, but I do it on behalf of the reader.

Jeff – And then you will also send me that, well, I already have your link about the color revolution, but you said you had one about the Electoral College and then one about the impeachment, I think. But anyway, go ahead and send me a couple of three links that you think are related to the elections, and I’ll add those to the page. How’s that sound?

Brett – That sounds great. Thanks for your courtesy. It’s been a pleasure getting to know you.

Jeff – Yeah, getting to know you too. And if I ever have a chance to come to Curaçao. Well, you’re leaving in a month. Well, anyway, I’m not going to get to see you in Curaçao, but anyway, I’m hoping our paths, you and I have done a lot of traveling collectively and hopefully, our paths will cross in the future.

Jeff – Thank you so much for being on, Brett.

Brett – Thank you. Have a great day.

Jeff – Bye.

###

Become a regular China Rising Radio Sinoland patron and get FREE BOOKS!

Support all my hard work, videos, podcasts and interviews on CRRS via PayPal!

Support my many hours of research and articles on CRRS via FundRazr!

Become a China Tech News Flash! patron and see your future now!

It all goes towards the same win-win goals: unique research, reporting on the real story of the Chinese people and truth telling in support of the global 99%, for a more just and mutually beneficial 21^st century.

In Solidarity, Jeff

Why and How China works: With a Mirror to Our Own History

44 Days Backpacking in China: The Middle Kingdom in the 21st Century, with the United States, Europe and the Fate of the World in Its Looking Glass

China Rising: Capitalist Roads, Socialist Destinations

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIG Red Book on China: Chinese History, Culture and Revolution

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in deniner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读

Wechat group: search the phone number +8613823544196 or my ID, Jeff_Brown-44_Days, friend request and ask Jeff to join the China Rising Radio Sinoland Wechat group. He will add you as a member, so you can join in the ongoing discussion.